MOHAMMED HUSSAIN Vs. GULAM KHADER KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition, filed under section 91 of the Hyderabad "Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act XXI of 1950 (hereinafter called 'the Act') raises the interpretation of section 98 of the Act. The relevant facts briefly are as follows. The respondent in the Revision Petition, Ghulam Khader Khan, filed an application on 7th March, 1955 before the Deputy Collector, Tandur, under section 98 of the Act, alleging that he was the protected tenant of Survey No. 501 of Dudyal village in Kodangal taluk, that the landlord was one Mir Nazir Ali Khan, and that at his instance Bhusa Fakira and Medku Yellayya dispossessed him from the lands. He also alleged that he filed an application in the Tahsil Office to recover possession on the basis of the tenancy certificate granted to him, but that application was not disposed of, and he was out of possession ; that during the year 1955, the lands were cultivated by Mohammed Hussain (petitioner in this revision petition) and Ghulam Khader Khan was not aware in what capacity he was cultivating. As the possession of those persons is wrongful, he prayed for their eviction.

(2.) The application was resisted by Mohammed Hussain. But the Deputy Collector ordered eviction, and that order was upheld in appeal by the District Collector, Gulbarga. Against that order, this Revision Petition was filed.

(3.) Sri Palnitkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that section 98 of the Act has no application to the present case, and, even if it applies, its requirements are not satisfied, and the petition should have been dismissed. In order to appreciate this contention, it is necessary to advert to the relevant provisions of the Act. Section 98 lays down as follows :-