https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272411 The evidence did not establish fraud or misrepresentation in the grant of the lease, so the lease was not invalidated on that ground. The defendants also failed to prove statutory ownership under the tenancy law because the lease was created after the relevant tillers' day and there was no subsisting tenancy when the exemption provision ceased to apply. A past-tenancy plea raised only as an incident of the ownership claim did not oust civil jurisdiction, and no independent tenancy issue required reference to the Mamlatdar. The Civil Court therefore retained jurisdiction, the reference was unwarranted, and the decree for possession was restored. en-us Wed, 21 Aug 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 May 2018 14:43:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272411 The evidence did not establish fraud or misrepresentation in the grant of the lease, so the lease was not invalidated on that ground. The defendants also failed to prove statutory ownership under the tenancy law because the lease was created after the relevant tillers' day and there was no subsisting tenancy when the exemption provision ceased to apply. A past-tenancy plea raised only as an incident of the ownership claim did not oust civil jurisdiction, and no independent tenancy issue required reference to the Mamlatdar. The Civil Court therefore retained jurisdiction, the reference was unwarranted, and the decree for possession was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Aug 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272411