As per the case facts, the legal heirs of a landlord appealed a High Court order concerning agricultural lands that had been leased. The original landlord had sought to regain ... possession of the land under a specific provision of the state's tenancy act. The central issue revolved around the size of the landlord's holding and whether a revisional authority had the power to rule on a point of law. This led to the appeal to the Supreme Court. The question arose whether the High Court's order should be set aside and whether the landlord's application under Section 43A of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1956, should be partially granted, particularly concerning the determination of the landlord's land holding. Finally, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and overturned the High Court's order. It partially granted the original landlord's application, confirming the appellants' entitlement to a portion of the land, and directed the local tehsildar to promptly facilitate the handover of physical possession. The Court clarified that the issue of the landlord's holding was a legal question that the revisional authority could have resolved.