MAN MOHAN & ORS. versus MOHD. MOHINUDDIN ALI KHAN (DEAD) BY L.RS.

Citation: [2008] 8 S.C.R. 108 · Decided: 09-05-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: TARUN CHATTERJEE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2008] 8 S.C.R 108 
MAN MOHAN & ORS. 
V. 
MOHD. MOHINUDDIN ALI KHAN (DEAD) BY L.RS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 5539 Of 2001) 
MAY 9, 2008 
[TARUN CHATTERJEE AND HARJIT SINGH BEDI, JJ.] 
Andhra Pradesh (Telengana Area) Tenancy and Agricul-
tural Lands Act, 1950; Ss. 2(g}, 40, 44, 45 & 46 and clarificatory 
C circular No. 650 dated March 30, 1951 issued by the Board of 
Revenue: 
Agricultural tenancy/protected tenancy - Eviction Peti-
tion - Allowed by the Authority - Application for restoration of 
D tenancy - Rejected by the Authorities - Appeal against al-
lowed by Appellate Authority - Revision Petition - Allowed by 
High Court doubting the claim of 'the appellant as adopted 
son of original tenant holding that the original land owner and 
his successor continue to cultivate the land in question after 
E getting back possession thereof - Correctness of - Held: In-
correct - There is no impediment to the maintenance of Ap-
plication for Restoration of Protected Tenancy as right of pro-
tected tenants are heritable with a few exceptions, which are of 
no concern in the instant case - A tenant is entitled to recov-
ery of possession in case owner does not cultivate the land 
F personally/discontinue the same after getting back the pos-
session - Cultivation of the land by the land owner/successor, 
with the help of two persons by giving them share of crop, would 
not amount to personal cultivation in terms of s. 2(g) of the Act 
- In the facts and circumstances of the case, clarificatory Cir-
G cular issued by the Board of Revenue not applicable - More-
over the Circular would not override the statutory provisions ul 
s. 2(g) of the Act - Agricultural tenancy - Protected tenants. 
An application was filed by the original land owner 
H 
108 
MAN MOHAN & ORS. v. 
109 
MOHD. MOHINUDDIN ALI KHAN (DEAD) BY L.RS. 
under Section 44 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telengana Area) A 
Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act for determination of 
the protected tenancy of the predecessor of interest of 
the appellants, tenants. The application was allowed by 
the Authorities. Appellants, successors of the said ten-
ant, filed an application u/ss.45 and 46 of the Act for res-
B 
toration of possession of the land on ground that the origi-
nal land owner or his successor had failed to cultivate 
the land in question. The application was rejected by the 
Authorities. The appeal preferred thereagainst by the 
successor of the original tenant was allowed by the Ap- c 
pellate Authority. The land owners field a Revision peti-
tion before the High Court, which was allowed by the High 
Court relying on Circular No. 650 dated March 30, 1951 
issued by the State Revenue Board holding that the origi-
nal landowner and after his death, his successor, with the D 
help of two persons cultivated the land in question. Hence 
the present appeal. 
Appellant-tenants contended that though adoption 
of appellant No.1 by the original tenant had been proved 
on record but even assuming for the moment that his E 
adoption had not been proved yet, the fact that the other 
three claimants were his legal heirs was admitted and they 
were accordingly entitled to maintain the application un-
der Sections 45 and 46 of the Act; that as per Section 45 
of the Act, if the land owner did not cultivate the land within 
F 
the time fixed in the said provision, the tenants were en-
titled to a restoration of the land on an application 
made for this purpose; and that as the final Court of 
fact had clearly opined that neither the original owner nor 
his successors had cultivated the land, the appellants were G 
entitled to succeed. 
--f 
Respondent-landowner submitted that the order of 
the Tahsildar granting an adoption certificate to appellant 
No. 1 was wholly without jurisdiction; and that there was 
no proof as to when the land owners had been engaged H 
110 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008) 8 S.C.R 
A for cultivating the land by the original land owner or his 
successors. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 It is true that the original tenant of the prop-
s erty in question lived upto the year 1973 but did not 
choose to make an application in terms of Sections 45 
and 46 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telengana Area) Tenancy 
and Agricultural Lands Act during his life time and left it to 
his successors to do so after his death. There is no im-
C pediment to the maintenance of such an application, and 
a perusal of s. 40 of the Act on the cor.trary clarifies that 
the rights of 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.