P.B. Sawant, J. - (1.)In the inquiry held under section 14 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the Surplus Land Determination Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the S. L. D. T.) came to the conclusion that the petitioner landholder had a total holding of 55 acres and 25 gunthas. Since he did not have more than five members in his family unit, his surplus holdings were declared as 1 acre and 25 gunthas. Against this decision of the Surplus Land Determination Tribunal dated the 27th April 1976, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Revenue Tribunal. The State also preferred their cross-objections before the Tribunal. The Revenue Tribunal by its decision dated the 5th July 1976, in fact, partly allowed the appeal and allowed the cross-objections in full. It may be noted that in the operative part of the Tribunal's order what is stated is "the appeal fails". From the perusal of the judgment which precedes the order, it is clear that the Tribunal had accepted the contention of the petitioner that the conversion of some of the lands made by the Surplus Land Determination Tribunal was not correct, and had accordingly corrected the calculation with regard to his total holding.
(2.)The contention raised in the petition is that an area of 6 acres and 39 gunthas comprised in Survey No. 116/2B was transferred by the petitioner in favour of his sister as evidenced by mutation entry dated the 13th April 1971. In return filed by her, she had shown the said land as her holding. Since her holding was below the ceiling area even after the inclusion of the said land, the proceedings against her were, however, dropped. The contention of the petitioner is that since the said land was shown by his sister in her return and was calculated in her total holding by virtue of the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 3, the said land could not be calculated over again in the holding of the petitioner. The contention though ingenuous does not require serious consideration. The provisions of sub-section (4) of section 3 are as follows:-
"No land shall be taken into consideration more than once in calculating the ceiling area for the holding of any person, or as the case may be of a family unit."

(3.)The underlying purpose of the aforesaid provisions is obvious. There may arise instances where the title to the land and /or its possession is in genuine dispute or parties are in or claim to be in joint possession under one or the other title. In the former case, the land can be included in the holding of one and not of both the parties whereas in the latter case only the proportionate share according to the possession claimed can be so included in the holding of the parties. These instances are given only as illustrations and they are not meant to be exhaustive on the point. The provision is in the nature of an injunction against the ceiling authority that on its own it will not calculate such land twice. It is not a bar against a land-holder showing in his holding lands which are included by another land-holder in his holding. Hence the said provision does not require the authority to disregard actual holding or a non-transfer or an illegal transfer or a transfer barred under the Act and to exclude it from the total holding of the actual holder or transferor. If the so called claimant or transferee of such land also chooses to show the land in his or her holding the said injunction does not come into play, for the injunction is against the authority and not against the landholder.