SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1956 Supreme(Bom) 140

M.C.CHAGLA, P.B.GAJENDRAGADKAR, D.V.VYAS
Dattatraya Vishnu – Appellant
Versus
Ganpat Ragho and Anr – Respondent


Judgment -1. This Pull Bench has been constituted to construe Clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 34 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948. When we look at the scheme of Section 34, Sub-section (1) gives the right to a landlord to evict his tenant if he bona fide requires the land for cultivating it personally or for any non-agricultural use for his own purpose. Sub-section (2) places certain restrictions upon the landlord from obtaining the land even if his case falls under Sub-section (1), and the first restriction is contained in Clause (a) which fixes a ceiling of the holding of the landlord and provides that even if the landlord, requires the land bona fide for personal cultivation, he cannot obtain the land if it goes beyond the ceiling. Then Clause (b) deals with a case where the tenant has become a member of a co-operative farming society. Clause (c), with which we are concerned, was enacted by Act 33 of 1952 and it is in the following terms:

"(c) to terminate the tenancy of a protected tenant on the ground that the landlord requires the land for cultivating it personally, unless the income by the cultivation of such land will be the main source of the i









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top