Prati Appala Raju vs Muthuraju Surapa Raju

The accused was a tenant in possession of lands of which the complainant is said to be the landholder, His father was in possession before him.

The landlord sued him in ejectment and a decree for possession was passed in his favour before the Estates Land Act came into force on the

ground that the tenant had no occupancy right and that his right to possession had been determined by notice to quit. He is now prosecuted and

convicted u/s 212 of the Estates Land Act for being in possession of the land without the landlord''s consent. Section 212 of the Estates Land Act

would apply only if the decree could be treated as one passed u/s 163. It could not be so treated in this case as the accused is not a person who

occupies the land otherwise than by inheritance. The conviction cannot therefore be sustained. The conviction and sentence are set aside and the

fine if levied will be refunded.