JUDGMENT : J.C. Shah, J. Umabai-hereinafter called 'the plaintiff'-was the tenure-holder of a three-fourth share in Survey No. 17 of village Utrada in taluq Chikhli, district Buldana. Waman was the tenant of that land. The plaintiff served a notice under section 38(2) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act 99 of 1958, calling upon the tenant to deliver possession of the land on the ground that she required the land for personal cultivation, and applied to the Tahsildar for an order in that behalf. This application was granted by the Tahsildar, but the order was set aside in appeal and the case was remanded sometime in June 1963. In the meanwhile the plaintiff served notices on the tenant in respect of each of the three years 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62 that he had committed default in payment of rent accruing due respectively on March 31, 1960, March 31, 1961 and March 31, 1962. By the second and third notices the plaintiff informed the tenant of her intention to terminate the tenancy and furnished particulars of the grounds on which termination was claimed. By the last notice the tenant was called upon to pay rent for three years and he was informed that in default of payment the tenancy will stand terminated after three months. The tenant failed to remedy the breach. 2. On March 27, 1963 the plaintiff applied to the Tenancy Naib-Tahsildar under section 19(2) read with section 30(2) and section 36(2) for an order determining the tenancy, and permitting the plaintiff to take possession. The tenant pleaded that he had acquired ownership of the land under section 46(1) as from April 1, 1961, and on that account the application was not maintainable. The Tahsildar by his order directed the tenant to pay Rs. 232-50 within three months and declared that in default the tenancy will stand determined. The tenant did not carry out the direction of the Tahsildar. The plaintiff appealed against the order of the Tahsildar to the Sub-Divisional Officer who allowed the appeal holding that the tenancy stood determined before title to the land vested in the tenant under section 46(1) of the Act. But the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal exercising powers in revision set aside the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer. The plaintiff appealed against the order of the Tahsildar to the Sub-Divisional Officer who allowed the appeal holding that the tenancy stood determined before title to the land vested in the tenant under section 46(1) of the Act. But the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal exercising powers in revision set aside the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer. In the view of the Revenue Tribunal the claim made by the plaintiff was 'rendered untenable' because by virtue of section 46(1) of the Act the tenant had become a statutory owner of the land in his possession on and with effect from April 1, 1961, and the relation of landlord and tenant stood extinguished by operation of law on and from April 1, 1961. 3. The plaintiff then moved a petition in the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur under Article 227 of the Constitution. The High Court set aside the order of the Revenue Tribunal and restored the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer. The High Court held that the tenant had not become the owner of the land and the relation of landlord and tenant was subsisting on March 27, 1963. The tenant appeals to this Court with special leave. 4. The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act 99 of 1958 was enacted with the object, amongst others, to confer rights of ownership in respect of lands in the personal cultivation of tenants, and for certain other purposes. The application of the Act is restricted to the Vidarbha Region of the State of Maharashtra after the Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960, By section 19 it is provided; "(1) Notwithstanding any agreement, usage, decree or order of a Court of law, the tenancy of any land held by a tenant shall not be terminated- XXX (II) Unless the landlord has given three months' notice in writing informing the tenant of his decision to terminate the tenancy and the particulars of the ground for such termination and within that period the tenant has failed to remedy the breach for which the tenancy is liable to be terminated. x x x" Section 30 provides: "(1) Where any tenancy of any land held by any tenant is terminated for non-payment of rent and the landlord files any proceeding to eject the tenant, the Tahsildar shall call upon the tenant to tender to the landlord the rent in arrears together with the costs of the proceeding, within three months from the date of the order, and if the tenant complies with such order, the Tahsildar shall, in lieu of making an order for ejectment, pass an order directing that the tenancy had not been terminated and thereupon the tenant shall hold the land as if the tenancy had not been terminated: Provided x x x (2) Nothing in this section shall apply to any tenant whose tenancy has been terminated for non-payment of rent, if such tenant has failed for any three years to pay rent and the landlord has given intimation to the tenant to that effect within a period of three months on each default." Sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 36, insofar as they are relevant, provide: "(2) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (3A), no landlord shall obtain possession of the land, x x x held by a tenant except under an order of the Tahsildar. x x x (3) On receipt of an application under sub-section (1) or (2), the Tahsildar shall, after holding an inquiry, pass such order thereon as he deems fit: Provided that where an application under sub-section (2) is made by a landlord in pursuance of the right conferred on him under section 38, the Tahsildar may first decide as preliminary issues, whether the conditions specified in clauses (c) and (a) of sub-section (3) and clauses (b), (c) and (d) of sub-section (4) of that section are satisfied. If the Tahsildar finds that any of the said conditions are not satisfied he shall reject the application forthwith." Section 38 which occurs in Chapter III provides by first sub-section: "(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 9 or 19 but subject to the provisions of sub-sections (2) to (5), landlord (not being a landlord within the meaning of Chapter III-A) may after giving to the tenant a notice in writing at any time on or before the 15th day of February 1961, and making an application for possession under section 36 on or before the 31st day of March 1961, terminate the tenancy of the land held by a tenant other than an occupancy tenant if he bona fide requires the land for cultivating it personally: Provided that, where any notice has been given at any time before the commencement of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region and Kutch Area) (Amendment) Act, 1960, then notwithstanding that the period of one year mentioned in that notice has not expired, the landlord, in order to terminate the tenancy under this section, shall make an application for possession not later than the 31st day of March 1961." Sub-section (3) of section 38 provides for certain conditions on which the landlord may terminate a tenancy, and sub-section (4) provides for cases in which the tenancy shall not be terminated. Section 39A which was incorporated by Maharashtra Act 2 of 1962 provides by sub-sections (1) and (2): "(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 9, 19, 38 or 39, but subject to the provisions of this section, a landlord who before the 15th day of February 1961 held as tenure-holder land not exceeding one-third of a family holding and who earns his livelihood principally by agriculture or by agricultural labour may terminate the tenancy of his tenant (not being an occupancy tenant) if the landlord bona fide requires the land for cultivating it personally. (2) The landlord shall, for terminating the tenancy, give such tenant notice in writing within one year from the date of the commencement of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region and Kutch Area) (Amendment) Act, 1961, and make an application for possession as provided in sub-section (2) of section 86 before the 1st day of April, 1963, notwithstanding that in respect of the same tenancy an application of the landlord made in accordance with sub-section (1) of section 38 or of section 39- (i) is pending before the Tahsildar or in appeal before the Collector, or in revision before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on the date of the commencement of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region and Kutch Area) (Amendment) Act, 1961 x x x or (ii) has been rejected by any authority before the commencement date." Section 41 confers certain rights upon the tenants to purchase lands. It provides by first sub-section: "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any law, usage or contract but subject to the provisions of sections 42 to 44 (both inclusive) a tenant other than an occupancy tenant shall, in the case of land held by him as a tenant, be entitled to purchase from the landlord the land held by him as a tenant and cultivated by him personally." Section 46(1) provides: "Notwithstanding anything in this Chapter or any law for the time being in force or any custom, usage, decree, contract or grant to the contrary, with effect on and from first day of April 1961, the ownership of all lands held by tenants which they are entitled to purchase from their landlords under any of the provisions of this Chapter shall stand transferred to and vest in such tenants and from such date such tenants shall be deemed to be the full owners of such land: Provided that if on such date any such tenant is of the following category, namely: (a) a minor, (b) a widow, (c) a serving member of the armed forces, or (d) a person subject to any physical or mental disability, the ownership of the land shall stand transferred- (i) to the tenant on the expiry of one year from the date on which the tenant of category (a) attains majority, the tenant of category (c) ceases to serve in such force, the tenant of category (d) ceases to be subject to such disability; and (ii) in the case of a widow to her successor-in-title on the expiry of one year from the date on which the widow's interest in the land ceases to exist: Provided further that where in respect of any such land, any proceeding under section 19, 20, 21, 36 or 38 is pending on the date specified in sub-section (1) the transfer of ownership of such land shall take effect on the date on which such proceeding is finally decided and the tenant retains possession of the land in accordance with the decision in such proceeding." "Notwithstanding anything contained in section 41 or 46, or any custom, usage, decree, contract or grant to the contrary but subject to the provisions of this section, on and from the 1st day of April 1963 the ownership of all land held by a tenant (being land which is not transferred to the tenant under section 46 or which is not purchased by him under section 41 or 50 shall stand transferred to and vest, in such tenant who shall from the date aforesaid, be deemed to be the full owner of such land, if such land is cultivated' by him personally, and (i) the landlord has not given notice of the termination of tenancy in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 38 or section 39 or sub-section (2) of section 39A; or (ii) the landlord has given such notice but has not made an application thereafter under section 36 for possession as required by those sections; or (iii) the landlord (being a landlord not belonging to any of the categories specified in sub-section (2) of section 38) has not terminated the tenancy on any of the grounds specified in section 19; or has so terminated the tenancy but has not applied to tie Tahsildar on or before the 31st day of March 1963 under section 36 for possession of the land: Provided that, where the landlord has made such application for possession, then the tenant shall, on the date on which the application is finally decided, be deemed to be the full owner of the land which he is entitled to retain in possession after such decision." 5. The landlord is by virtue of these provisions competent to terminate the rights of a tenant on one or more of the grounds mentioned in section 19. When he requires the land for personal cultivation he is competent to terminate the tenancy under section 38(1) and section 39A. The procedure to be followed for obtaining an order of termination of tenancy for non-payment of rent is prescribed by section 30, and by section 36 the landlord is restrained from obtaining of possession of any land otherwise than under an order of the Tahsildar. But by section 46 the ownership of a land held by a tenant on April 1, 1961 who is entitled to purchase from the landlord under any of the provisions in Chapter III stands transferred to and vests in such tenant and the tenant becomes the full owner of such land from that date. That rule issubject to two provisos. Where the tenant is a minor, a widow, a serving member of the armed forces or a person subject to any physical or mental disability, the vesting of ownership in the tenant is deferred for the periods specified in that proviso; and where in respect of any such land, any proceeding under section 19, 20, 21, 36 or 38 is pending on the date specified in subsection (1) the transfer of ownership of such land takes effect on the date on which such proceeding is finally decided and the tenant retains possession of the land in accordance with the decision in such proceeding. The effect of the provisos is to defer the vesting of possession in the land till the contingencies mentioned, and during the interregnum the relation of landlord and tenant subsists. Prima facie, the deferment of the vesting of possession in the land in the tenant would only be so long as the conditions are not satisfied and a proceeding under any of the sections set out in the second proviso is pending for an order in ejectment. If an order is made in favour of the tenant, the landlord's title would vest in the tenant and he would be the full owner thereof. If an order is made in favour of the tenant, the landlord's title would vest in the tenant and he would be the full owner thereof. But by section 49A during the pendency of the proceeding in consequence of which vesting is deferred, it is open to the landlord, to commence an action determining the tenancy on any of the grounds, other than those on which the proceeding pending on April 1, 1961, was filed. In the present case on April 1, 1961, a proceeding for an order in ejectment on the ground of personal cultivation by the plaintiff was pending and until that proceeding was disposed of, the relation of landlord and tenant subsisted. Before that proceeding was disposed of, the plaintiff commenced a proceeding for an order in ejectment under section 36 read with section 30 of the Act, relying upon the notices served in accordance with the provisions of section 19. Section 49A(1) expressly operates notwithstanding anything contained in section 41 or section 46 or any other custom, usage, decree, contract or grant. It clearly implies that so long as the proceeding pending on April 1, 1961 is not disposed of, the landlord may commence till April 1, 1963, but not thereafter a proceeding for termination of tenancy, relying upon a ground on which the tenancy may be terminated under the Act. The proviso to section 49A(1) clearly enacts that where the landlord has made such application for possession, the tenant shall, on the date on which the application is finally decided, be deemed to be the full owner of the land which he is entitled to retain in possession after such decision. It is clear that if a proceeding under section 36 has been commenced on any of the grounds mentioned in section 38, 39 or 39A(2) for termination of tenancy under section 19 before March 31, 1963, the right of tenant does not arise until the proceeding is determined in favour of the tenant. The clearest implication of clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of section 49A(1) is that if such an application is pending the right of the tenant does not arise and that is further clarified by the proviso. If the right of the tenant to hold the land is negatived in a proceeding which is pending, evidently he cannot acquire title to the land. 6. If the right of the tenant to hold the land is negatived in a proceeding which is pending, evidently he cannot acquire title to the land. 6. In the present case a proceeding which was commenced under section 38 for termination of the tenancy on the ground of cultivating the land personally by the plaintiff was pending on April 1, 1961. The plaintiff has filed an application for termination of the tenancy on the grounds mentioned in section 19 and had applied for an order under section 36 before March 31, 1963. The plaintiff was, therefore, entitled to rely upon any of the grounds for forfeiture of tenancy which arose between April 1, 1961 and March 31, 1963. Notices as required by section 19(II) had been served upon the tenant in respect of the three years and the tenant was in default in payment of rent for three years. The procedural requirements for filing an application in ejectment have been complied with. The tenancy was duly terminated and an order consistent with the provisions of sections 30 and 36 was made. In our judgment, the High Court was right in setting aside the order of the Revenue Tribunal and restoring the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer. 7. The appeal fails and is dismissed. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.