https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189159 Under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, as it stood before the 1956 amendment, a protected tenant's right to recover possession from a landlord who had taken land for personal cultivation was not heritable. The Court contrasted the pre-1956 statutory wording with the earlier 1939 Act and the amended 1956 position, noting that the earlier provisions did not deem the tenancy to continue in favour of the heir or heirs. On that language, the restoration right under Section 37 was confined to the tenant personally, and the heirs could not enforce it. en-us Wed, 21 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Dec 2016 17:10:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189159 Under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, as it stood before the 1956 amendment, a protected tenant's right to recover possession from a landlord who had taken land for personal cultivation was not heritable. The Court contrasted the pre-1956 statutory wording with the earlier 1939 Act and the amended 1956 position, noting that the earlier provisions did not deem the tenancy to continue in favour of the heir or heirs. On that language, the restoration right under Section 37 was confined to the tenant personally, and the heirs could not enforce it. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189159