9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (8) TMI 216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nly question for consideration is whether the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 28 of the Act as amended in 1960 would apply to this case. Section 28(1) of the Act reads: Where a tenancy of any land held by a tenant is terminated for non payment of rent and the land holder files any proceeding to eject the tenant, the Tahsildar shall call upon the tenant to tender to the land holder the rent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he following words at the end of the existing proviso: and the land-holder has given intimation to the tenant of the default within a period of six months of each default. The Amendment Act received the assent of the President on December 18, 1960 and was published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette, Extraordinary, on December 29, 1960. 2. The appellant was the owner of agricultural land mea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred a revision before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad. The Tribunal allowed the revision petition holding that the landlord not having intimation to the tenant of the default within a period of six months of each default as required by the amended Section 28 of the Act, could cot succeed. The appellants before us question the propriety of the order passed by the Revenue Tribunal. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s case (supra) was followed by this Court in a number of cases: Sakharam v. Manikchand Mothichand Shah and Anr. Hungerford Investment Trust Limited v. Haridas Mundhra and Ors. Lalji Raja & Sons v. Hansraj Nathuram . In the present the application for possession was made long after the amendment came into force; even the right to institute a proceeding does not appear to have accrued before the ame ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
