HABIB GULAM RASUL Vs. PUNJABHAI BHAGWANBHAI DECD
LAWS(GJH)-1988-1-9
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on January 18,1988

HABIB GULAM RASUL Appellant
VERSUS
Punjabhai Bhagwanbhai Decd Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MOHAMMAD YUNUS VS. MOHAMMAD MUSTAQIM [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

D.H.SHUKLA - (1.)The petitioner Habib Gulam Rasul of village Limodra taluka Jhagadia district Broach was a tenant of a parcel of land bearing Survey No. 32 of village Kunverpara taluka Jhagadia district Broach. In the year 1963 one Punjabhai Bhagwanbhai since deceased and now represented by Minor Vardhabhai Punjabhai through his guardian Mathurbhai Purshottam respondent No. 1 herein having been the owner of aforesaid parcel of land bearing Survey No. 32 (hereinafter referred to as the concerned land) obtained possession of the concerned land under Sec. 32T of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 hereinafter referred to as the Tenancy Act on the ground that he required the land for personal cultivation. The concerned land was thus so recovered by Punjabhai Bhagwanbhai on 31-7-1963 by Order No. 480/Kunverpara dated 31-7-1963 of the ALT Jhagadia from the present petitioner who had become a deemed purchaser of the concerned land on 1-4-1957.
(2.)After having obtained the possession of concerned land said Punjabhai Bhagwanbhai evecuted a Registered sale deed of the concerned land on 15-5-1969 in favour of respondents No. 2 and 3 herein. The concerned land was transferred by the aforesaid sale deed along with other parcels of land. To put it in other words Survey No. 32 was one of the survey numbers which was sold by Punjabhai Bhagwanbhai to respondents Nos. 2 and 3 by the aforesaid sale-deed dated 15-5-1969.
(3.)The petitioner filed an application under Sec. 37 of the Tenancy Act for obtaining possession of the concerned land on the ground that the landlord i.e. to say respondent No. 1 had ceased to cultivate the personal land and that he had committed a breach of Sec. 37(1) of the Tenancy Act. It was his case that the concerned land was cultivated by respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and not by respondent No. 1.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.