This appeal by special leave is directed against the order of remand passed by the High Court.
Respondents appeal against the older of eviction was dismissed by the Assistant Commissioner but in a further appeal, the Deputy Commissioner set aside the order of eviction.
The appellants thereupon filed a revision application before the Mysore Revenue Tribunal, a full Bench of which by a judgment dated February 24, 1960 allowed the Revision petition and companyfirmed the decree of eviction passed by the Tehsildar, The respondent thereafter filed a Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution in the Mysore High Court, being C.P. No 607 of 1969, On October 2, 1962, which was during the pendency of the Writ petition, the Mysore Land Reforms Act, 10 of 1962, came into force Section 23 2 of that Act provides, to the extent material, that numberwithstanding anything companytained in any enactment or provision of law repealed by Section 142 of the Act, any proceeding pending on the appointed day or instituted on or before that day in pursuance of any such repealed enactment or law before any companyrt, officer or authority for eviction of a tenant on the ground of default of payment of rent, such companyrt, officer or authority shall number order eviction of the tenant, if the tenant pays to the landlord the arrears of rent together with companyts of the proceedings as decided by such companyrt, officer or authority within such period as it may fix.
In that suit, an order of eviction was passed by the Tehsildar against the respondent and on August 6, 1958 the appellants obtained actual possession of the suit lands from the respondent in execution of the order passed by the Tehsildar.
In view of this provision and following the judgment of this Court in C.A. 618 of 1962 dated March 1, 1965 Ambanna Sahu Shinde dend by his legal repre entatives Smt.
Thereupon, the appellants filed a suit for evicting the respondent under the Section 15 read with Section 29 of the Mysore Tenancy Act of 1952.
S. Sarkaria, J. The appellants filed a proceeding before the Tehsildar against the respondent for recovery of rent and obtained an order in that be half in 1956 That order was companyfirmed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner.
