In Brief
The appellant sought to resume 4 acres of land from tenants under the Mysore Land Reforms Act, 1961. A compromise deed was executed in 1970 whereby the tenants agreed to surrender the land and confirmed that possession had already been handed over. The High Court rejected the appellant's claim on the technical ground that the statutory procedure under Section 14(5) was not strictly followed. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that where a valid composite compromise is entered into before the competent Tribunal and acted upon by actual delivery of possession, technical procedural non-compliance is not fatal. The appellant had acquired legal possession from the date the compromise was accepted.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.