Sangram Singh vs Election Tribunal, Kotah,Bhurey Lal ... on 22 March, 1955
In SANGRAM SINGH v. ELECTION TRIBUNAL, KOTAH, , the Supreme Court has held that acting under writ jurisdiction this Court is not required to act as a Court of appeal or as a Court of revision. By the evidence on record the petitioner has not been able to prove that he is the tenant of the land, no miscarriage of justice has been done by the Tribunal, which has dismissed the Form No. 7 filed by the petitioner. The basic fact that was required to be proved viz., that there was a lease agreement in his father's favour by respondent No. 1's grand-father is not proved by the petitioner. He has failed to prove that he is the tenant of the land. Therefore, in view of his failure to prove this point, no occupancy rights could have been granted by the Land Tribunal. As per the ruling quoted above if the relationship of landlord and tenant does not rest on agrarian relations, the tenant who is in possession of the land, even if the land is an agricultural land within the meaning of the Act, cannot avail himself of any benefit under the Act. In my opinion this ruling applies with all force to the facts of this case.