The petitioner appealed to the Collector under Section 74 of the Act who set aside the Mamlatdars order.
He applied under Section 29 2, to the Mamlatdar.
on 19 6 1956 Bom the respondent was the owner of the land in question.
On January 16, 1961 the appellant applied to the Deputy Collector under Section 84 of the Act for summary eviction of respondent 1.
On May 15, 1956 the appellant voluntarily handed over possession of the said lands to respondent 1.
The petitioner then obtained possession in pursuance of the Collectors said order but the respondent forcibly dispossessed him and thereupon on January 10, 1952 the petitioner companyplained to the Mamlatdar.
The Mamlatdar passed an order directing the petitioner, the tenant, to hand over possession.
Respondent 1 is the owner of Survey Nos.
974/2 and 975/4 situate in the village Delol in district Panchmahals and the appellant at the material time was the tenant thereof.
But before the Collector passed his said order the respondent executed the Mamlatdars order and obtained possession.
In Krishna Mahar v. Hussain Miya, Spl.
There are two unreported decisions, one by the High Court of Gujarat and the other by the High Court of Bombay to which also our attention was drawn.
It is number in dispute that respondent 1 thereafter personally cultivated the said lands.
207 of 1956 decided by Shah, and Vyas JJ.
The facts relevant to this appeal are short and numberlonger in dispute.
Civil Appeal No.
