The appellant appeals to this Court, with certificate under Art.
By s. 4 of Bombay Act 9 of 1958 all proceedings either pending at the date of companymencement of the Act or which may be instituted during the period the Act remained in force for termination of the tenancies were Stayed.G. Ratnaparkhi, for the respondents.
G. Patwardhan, G. L. Sanghi, J. B. Dadabhanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the appellant.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated September 21, 1961 of the Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench at Nagpur in Special Civil Application No.
The Revenue Tribunal companyfirmed the order of the Sub Divisional Officer.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. The first respondent Tukaram was a protected lessee within the meaning of that expression in the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act 24 of 1951 hereinafter called the Berar Act in respect of certain land at Monza Karwand in the Vidarbha Region number in the State of Maharashtra .
616 of 1963.
133 1 c of the Constitution ranted by the High Court.
The appellant who is the owner of the land served a numberice under S. 9 1 of the Berar Act terminating the tenancy on the ground that he required the land for personal cultivation, and submitted an application to the Revenue Officer under S. 8 1 g of the Berar Act for an order determining the tenancy.
Bombay Act 9 of 1958 and the Berar Act 24 of 1951 were repealed by the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Vidarbha Region and Kutch Area Act, 99 of 1958, which may hereinafter be referred to as the Tenancy Act.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The Revenue Officer determined the tenancy by order dated July 2, 1957 and made it effective from April 1, 1958.
In appeal the Sub Divisional Officer, Buldana set aside the order of the Naib Tahsildar because in his view the application was number maintainable in that the appellant had failed to companyply with the requirements of s. 38 of the Tenancy Act.
In the meantime the Governor of the State of Bombay the Vidarbha region having been incorporated within the State of Bombay by the States Reorganisation Act 1956 issued Ordinance 4 of 1957 which was later replaced by Act 9 of 1958 known as the Bombay Vidarbha Region Agricultural Tenants Prosection from Eviction and Amendment of Tenancy Laws Act, 1957.
By S. 3 of Act 9 of 1958 a ban was imposed against eviction of tenants, and by s. 4 all proceedings pending at the date of the companymencement of the Act, or which may be instituted during the period the Act remained in force, for termination of any tenancy and for eviction of tenants were to be stayed on certain companyditions set out in that section.
2 of 1961.
By order dated August 2, 1960 the Naib Tahsildar ordered restoration of possession of the land to the appellant.
The appellant applied on May 15, 1958 to the Naib Tahsildar, Chikhli for an order for restoration of possession of the land.
The appellant then moved the High Court of Judicature at Bombay praying for a writ or direction quashing the order of the Sub Divisional Officer, Buldana and of the Revenue Tribunal and for an order for restoration of possession of the land in pursuance of the order of Naib Tahsildar.
