A lease granted to an industrial or commercial undertaking for a period of twelve years is valid and falls within the exemption provided under Section 88(1)(b) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, even if the company does not have actual physical possession of the lands in dispute, provided that the company has constructive possession by virtue of the transfer of the right to recover rent and the right to recover possession after the expiration of the tenants' leases.

1. These two special civil applications raise an interesting question under Section 88(1)(b), Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The facts leading up to the applications are simple, but the facts in each application will have to be stated separately.

2. In Special Civil Application No. 1449, the facts are these. The land in dispute is a piece of land which is described as Block No. 32 situate at a village called Murgud in the Kagal Jahagir of the former Kolhapur State. The owner is the Rajasaheb of Kagal and by a lease dated 10-12-1948 the land Was given to the applicant Ganapathi upon a lease for a period of 4 years. The period of the lease would expire on 9-12-1952.

3. In Special Civil Application No. 1450 of 1955, the facts are these. Two pieces of land described as Block Nos. 4 and 5 situate at a village Yamage in the same Jahagir of the former Kolhapur State are of the ownership of the Rajesaheb of Kagal and by a lease dated 18-12-1947 the Rajesaheb granted the property to the applicants Ramchandra and Govind and two others for a period of four years. The period of the lease would expire on 17-12-1951.

4. On 1-3-1949 the Kolhapur state merged with the State of Bombay and on 1-3-1949 the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 was made applicable to the Kolhapur State.

5. It appears that a company called the Maharashtra Agricultural Products Ltd. was form., ed some time in 1948-49 and the Rajesaheb of Kagal granted a lease to this limited company on 19-2-1949, the period of the lease being a period of twelve years. The tenants in the two special applications made in 1949 separate applications to the Mamlatdar, Kagal, for determination of reasonable rent under Section 12 of the Act and the Mamlatdar passed two separate orders fixing reasonable rent at Rs. 2.225-3-0 in the one case and Rs. 2,550-8-6 In the other.

It may be mentioned that the rent agreed Under the two leases was respectively Rs. 7,450-4-10 and Rs. 5,434. The matters were then taken before the District Deputy Collector S. D. Kolhapur both by the landlord and by the tenants and in the appeals filed by the landlord, the District Deputy Collector, S. D. Koihapur, allowed the appeals and set aside the orders passed by the Bombay Revenue Tribunal and from the last named orders the tenants have filed the aforesaid special Civil applications under Article 227 of the Constitution. As the two special civil applications raise a common question, it will be convenient to dispose of these two applications by a common Judgment.

6. The only question for decision is whether the lease executed by the Rajesaheb in favour of the Maharashtra Agricultural Products Limited, is saved from the operation of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, and this question depends upon a proper interpretation of Section 83 (1)(b) which provides:

"Nothing in the foregoing provision of this Act shall apply-

to lands held on lease for the benefit of an Industrial or commercial undertaking."

It is not disputed that the Maharashtra Agricultural Products Limited is an industrial or commercial undertaking. But Mr. Kotwal contends that the lease in favour of the company is not one which is covered by Section 88(1)(b).

Now, so far as the two leases are concerned those leases passed on 18-12-1947 and 10-12-1948 would be in operation until the expiration of the period of each "of them, so that the tenants under the lease of 18-12-1947 will be entitled to remain in possession until 17-12-1951, while the tenant under the lease passed on 10-12-1948 will be entitled to remain in possession until 9-12-1952 and here arises the question about the construction of Section 88(1)(b).

The lease which has been executed by the Rajesaheb in favour of the Maharashtra Agricultural Products Ltd. contains the following provisions. Although the lease was executed on 19-2-1949, the lease was to commence from December. 1948. The lease provides that the lands were given in possession of the limi