{"id":219709,"date":"2019-09-19T00:04:49","date_gmt":"2019-09-18T18:34:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=219709"},"modified":"2019-09-26T11:35:37","modified_gmt":"2019-09-26T06:05:37","slug":"words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/","title":{"rendered":"Words \u201cof the fact that he has attained majority\u201d of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 struck down"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court<\/strong>: Overruling the verdict in Appa Narsappa Magdum [Appa Narsappa Magdum v. Akubai Ganapati Nimbalkar, (1999) 4 SCC 443, the 3-judge bench of RF Nariman, R. Subhash Reddy and Surya Kant, JJ has held that the judgment does not square with object sought to be achieved by the 1956 Amendment to the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 or to the declaration of law in this judgment, it does not state the law correctly.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In Appa Narsappa Case, the division bench had held that the period of one year will have to be counted in accordance with the Sections 32-F and 31 of the 1948 Act and not from the date of the knowledge of the tenant. <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em>Under Section 32-F, tenant has right to purchase where landlord was minor or a widow or a person subject to mental or physical disability within one year from the expiry of the period during which such landlord is entitled to terminate the tenancy under Section 31<\/em><\/span>. Amendment in Section 32-F(1)(a) added by Act 49 of 1969 expressly covered a case of landlord who was minor and has attained majority. Intimation by a minor landlord who has attained majority has been made a statutory obligation of the landlord so that tenant may exercise his right of purchase. <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em>The other two categories which are a widow or a person subject to mental or physical disability have not been expressly included in the amendment incorporated by Act 49 of 1969<\/em><\/span>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court, hence, noticed that the classification made in favour of tenants of minor landlords as opposed to tenants of landlords of the other two categories is a classification which is arbitrary in nature. This being the case, such classification would ordinarily have to be struck down as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It, hence, held,<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cinstead of striking down such classification as a whole, what can be done is to strike down the words \u201c..of the fact that he has attained majority..\u201d, as a result of which, what is added by the 1969 Amendment to Section 32-F(1)(a) now ceases to be discriminatory, as it is applicable to tenants of all three categories of landlords.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hence, the object of the Amendment Act of 1969 is relevant and applicable in deciding the scope of the right to purchase by a tenant of a landlord who was a widow or suffering from mental or physical disability on Tillers\u2019 day.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court, further, noticed that <em><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">an absurd situation would be created by a literal reading of Section 32-F(1)(a)<\/span>.<\/em> The landlord being a widow is protected until her death. After her death, one year is given to her successors in interest to exercise the right of resumption. When this does not take place one year is granted from the expiry of this first one year to the tenant to exercise his statutory right. This cannot be done because the tenant does not know of the death of the widow. As a result, this very land which was not required by the landlord\u2019s successors in interest for personal cultivation, goes back to the landlord under Section 32-P in cases in which the landlord either has no land within the ceiling limit or some land which does not exhaust the ceiling limit. This anomaly indeed turns the entire scheme of agrarian reform on its head. The Court, hence, held that the successor-in-interest of a widow is obliged to send an intimation to the tenant of cessation of interest of the widow to enable the tenant to exercise his right of purchase.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">[Vasant Ganpat Padave v. Anant Mahadev Sawant, <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/5L5VHI1M\"><b>2019 SCC OnLine SC 1226<\/b><\/a>, decided on 18.09.2019]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court: Overruling the verdict in Appa Narsappa Magdum [Appa Narsappa Magdum v. Akubai Ganapati Nimbalkar, (1999) 4 SCC 443, the 3-judge <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":154914,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[37638,37639,37637,9741],"class_list":["post-219709","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act","tag-right-to-purchase","tag-section-32-f","tag-tenancy"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Words \u201cof the fact that he has attained majority\u201d of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 struck down | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Words \u201cof the fact that he has attained majority\u201d of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 struck down\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: Overruling the verdict in Appa Narsappa Magdum [Appa Narsappa Magdum v. Akubai Ganapati Nimbalkar, (1999) 4 SCC 443, the 3-judge\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-09-18T18:34:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-09-26T06:05:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/\",\"name\":\"Words \u201cof the fact that he has attained majority\u201d of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 struck down | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-09-18T18:34:49+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-09-26T06:05:37+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Words \u201cof the fact that he has attained majority\u201d of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 struck down\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\",\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"caption\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\"},\"description\":\"Senior Associate Editor\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Words \u201cof the fact that he has attained majority\u201d of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 struck down | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Words \u201cof the fact that he has attained majority\u201d of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 struck down","og_description":"Supreme Court: Overruling the verdict in Appa Narsappa Magdum [Appa Narsappa Magdum v. Akubai Ganapati Nimbalkar, (1999) 4 SCC 443, the 3-judge","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-09-18T18:34:49+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-09-26T06:05:37+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prachi Bhardwaj","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/","name":"Words \u201cof the fact that he has attained majority\u201d of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 struck down | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","datePublished":"2019-09-18T18:34:49+00:00","dateModified":"2019-09-26T06:05:37+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/19\/words-of-the-fact-that-he-has-attained-majority-of-section-32-f-of-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948-struck-down\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Words \u201cof the fact that he has attained majority\u201d of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 struck down"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942","name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","caption":"Prachi Bhardwaj"},"description":"Senior Associate Editor","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":255099,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/02\/explained-a-very-strange-provision-section-85a-of-the-maharashtra-tenancy-and-agricultural-lands-act-1948\/","url_meta":{"origin":219709,"position":0},"title":"Explained| &#8220;A very strange provision&#8221;: Section 85A of the\u00a0Maharashtra\u00a0Tenancy\u00a0and\u00a0Agricultural\u00a0Lands Act,\u00a01948","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"October 2, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The bench of Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ has explained the scope of a \u201cvery strange provision\u201d under Section 85A of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 and has held that \u201cThough Section 85(2) mandates that no order of the\u00a0 Mamlatdar, the Tribunal, the Collector\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":230960,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/06\/16\/testamentary-disposition-of-agricultural-land-to-a-non-agriculturist-defeats-the-purpose-of-sections-43-and-63-of-bombay-tenancy-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":219709,"position":1},"title":"Testamentary disposition of agricultural land to a non-agriculturist defeats the purpose of Sections 43 and 63 of Bombay Tenancy Act","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"June 16, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of UU Lalit, Indu Malhotra and AS Bopanna, JJ has held that an agriculturist cannot part with his agricultural land to a non-agriculturist though a 'Will' as per Sections 43 and 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands, Act, 1948 (the Tenancy Act). Section\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":256324,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/31\/explained-what-invalidates-surrender-of-tenancy-under-the-andhra-pradesh-tenancy-andhra-area-act-1956\/","url_meta":{"origin":219709,"position":2},"title":"Explained| What invalidates surrender of tenancy under the Andhra Pradesh Tenancy (Andhra Area) Act, 1956?","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"October 31, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Interpreting the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Tenancy (Andhra Area) Act, 1956, the bench of UU Lalit and S. Ravindra Bhat*, JJ has laid down the twin conditions that make a valid surrender of tenancy, firstly, three months\u2019 notice in writing to the landlord, and the Special Officer\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260330,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/20\/merely-because-the-same-caste-is-recognized-as-scheduled-caste-in-the-migrant-state-a-migrant-cannot-be-recognized-as-scheduled-caste-of-that-state-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":219709,"position":3},"title":"Merely because the same caste is recognized as Scheduled Caste in the migrant State, a migrant cannot be recognized as Scheduled Caste of that State: SC","author":"Editor","date":"January 20, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench comprising of M. R. Shah* and A.S. Bopanna, JJ., held that a person belonging to Scheduled Caste of one State and being an ordinarily and permanent resident of that State, cannot claim benefit of a Scheduled Caste in another State for the purpose of purchase\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Merely-because-the-same-caste-is-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-in-the-migrant-State-a-migrant-cannot-be-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-of-that-State-SC-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Merely-because-the-same-caste-is-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-in-the-migrant-State-a-migrant-cannot-be-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-of-that-State-SC-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Merely-because-the-same-caste-is-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-in-the-migrant-State-a-migrant-cannot-be-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-of-that-State-SC-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Merely-because-the-same-caste-is-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-in-the-migrant-State-a-migrant-cannot-be-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-of-that-State-SC-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Merely-because-the-same-caste-is-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-in-the-migrant-State-a-migrant-cannot-be-recognized-as-Scheduled-Caste-of-that-State-SC-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":55511,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/11\/tenant-can-continue-to-occupy-the-leased-premises-even-after-expiration-of-agricultural-lease-on-the-basis-of-holding-over-principle\/","url_meta":{"origin":219709,"position":4},"title":"Tenant can continue to occupy the leased premises even after expiration of agricultural lease on the basis of \u2018holding over\u2019 principle","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 11, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, Arun Mishra and P.C.Pant, JJ, were hearing a reference to decide the question as to whether after the expiry of the fixed term tenancy in respect of an agricultural lease under the Punjab Security of Land Tenure Act, 1953, the tenancy gets\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":367932,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/27\/jagadish-v-state-of-karnataka-ptcl-act-granted-land-analysis-2025\/","url_meta":{"origin":219709,"position":5},"title":"Granted Land under PTCL Act: An Analysis of Jagadish v. State of Karnataka","author":"Editor","date":"November 27, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"by Pavithra Thammaiah*, Amruthavarshini** and Esha Sanjyot Shah***","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Experts Corner&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Experts Corner","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/experts_corner\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"PTCL Act Granted Land Interpretation","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/PTCL-Act-Granted-Land-Interpretation.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/PTCL-Act-Granted-Land-Interpretation.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/PTCL-Act-Granted-Land-Interpretation.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/PTCL-Act-Granted-Land-Interpretation.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/219709","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/121"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=219709"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/219709\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/154914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=219709"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=219709"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=219709"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}