JUDGMENT - (1) The facts which have given rise to this reference to the Full Bench, are as follows: The petitioners are the land holders of three lands of which the opponent no. 1, herein after referred to as the opponent, was a protected lessee under the provisions of the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951 (XXIV of 1951) , hereinafter referred to as the B. R. A. L. Act. The petitioners gave a notice terminating the tenancy of the opponent under sub-section (1) of section 9 of the Act. The opponent then made an application to the Sub-Divisional Officer under sub-section (3) of section 9, in which he prayed that the notice should be declared to be invalid and inoperative. On this application, the Sub-Divisional Officer made an order on 12-11-1956 terminating the lease of the opponent with effect from 1-4-1957. Against this order, the opponent appealed to the Additional Deputy Commissioner, who set aside the order of the Sub-Divisional officer and held that the notice given by the petitioners was invalid. There was a second appeal by the petitioners to the Revenue Tribunal. On 13-2-1958 the Revenue Tribunal allowed the appeal of the petitioners, set aside the order mad

Click Here to Read the rest of this document