JUDGMENT-This second appeal is by the plaintiff. The learned Assistant Judge, Satara, by his judgment and decree dated 18th August 1970 allowed the defendant's appeal, set aside the decree passed by the trial Court and dismissed the plaintiff's suit with costs.

2. At all times material, the plaintiff was the tenant of Sundrabai, the originallst defendant, in respect of 9 pieces of agricultural lands within the limits of village Nidhal, Taluka Khatav, District Satara. Sundrabai was a widow-landlady. She died after the .suit was dismissed and her heirs prosecuted the civil appeal. Defendant No.2, a relative of Sundrabai, falsely claimed that he. was cultivating the suit lands on behalf of defendant No. 1. Defendant No.2 also is one of the heirs of defendant No.1 in the civil appeal. Defendant No.3 has no part to play in the present litigation, but he is also one of the heirs of Sundrabai. The plaintiff's case is that he has been illegally possessed of the suit lands on 9th March 1966 without holding a proper enquiry under section 32G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter called as "Bombay Tenancy Act"), and without following the provisions of the said Ac

Click Here to Read the rest of this document