TULZAPURKAR, J. :- This matter has been referred to a Division Bench by Mr. Justice Masodkar since he felt that there was an apparent conflict between a decision delivered by Mr. Justice Padhye on 20th/21st September, 1966, in Madhav v. Shripat, (Special Civil Appln. No. 929 of 1965) (Bom) and the view taken by Mr. Justice Deshmukh in Baburao v. Shionath, (1967 Mah LJ 670), and the petition involved a question as to what would be the correct position applicable to this class of cases where a protected tenant had taken proceedings under Section 9 (3) of the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Berar Act 1951) to challenge the notice served upon him by his landlord under Section 9 (1) of the said Act.

2. The facts giving rise to the present petition may be stated. The respondent is a landlady of certain field, bearing survey number 3, admeasuring 29 acres 19 gunthas, situated at mouza Karak, in tahsil Yeotmal. The petitioner has been a tenant of this land since 1956 onwards and admittedly was a protected lessee within the meaning of that expression as given in the Berar Act 1951. The respondent landlady served a notice dated 14th D