LawforAll

Showing posts with label BAYAJI SAMBHU MALI @ BORATE(D) THROUGH LRS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS NAZIR MOHAMMED BALAL ZARI THROUGH GPA HOLDER & ORS. RESPONDENT(S). Show all posts
Showing posts with label BAYAJI SAMBHU MALI @ BORATE(D) THROUGH LRS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS NAZIR MOHAMMED BALAL ZARI THROUGH GPA HOLDER & ORS. RESPONDENT(S). Show all posts
Thursday, February 14, 2019

landlady filed an application under Section 32(P) read with Section 32F for declaration that the deemed statutory purchase by the tenant was void as there was no required notice under Section 32F(1A) of the Act. = The position as disclosed by a combined and harmonious reading of Sections 31, 32, 32F and 32G may be stated thus : a) Where the landlord has not served on the tenant, a notice of termination (as stated in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 32), the tenant is deemed to have purchased the land on the tillers day (1.4.1957); b) Where the tenant is deemed to have purchased the land on the Tillers Day (1.4.1957), the Lands Tribunal is required to issue notice and determine the price of land to be paid by tenant. Where there is a deemed purchase, but the right to purchase is postponed, the Land Tribunal shall determine the price of land, as soon as may be after the postponed date; -------- f) Where a landlord, who is a widow, exercises her right of termination and secures possession of part of the tenanted land for personal cultivation under section 31(1) of the Act, then there is no question of her successorin-title giving a notice of termination within one year from the date on which the widow’s interest ceases to exist. When section 31 (3) ceases to apply, section 32F also will not apply and there is no need for the tenant to give any intimation under section 32F(1A).”= There is no doubt in the case that the appellant admittedly was a tenant of the first respondent. We hold it is a case where there was no need for the appellant to send any intimation within the meaning of Section 32F(1A). He had acquired a deemed status with the rejection of the application filed by the landlord. The appellant was not obliged to do anything further. In view of the matter, we allow the appeals and set aside the impugned decisions passed by the High Court and restore the order passed by the Collector.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph  Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1644-1645...