CHAITRAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was writ petitioner before the Bombay High court in Writ Petition No. 2611 of 1976 whereby he challenged the decision of the Revenue tribunal which rejected his contention that certain portions of the land declared by the owner under the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (the "ceiling Act") were in his possession as a deemed tenant and were, therefore, not liable to be included in the declaration of the owner. The appellant has produce Annx. P-l dated 9/08/1971, which is an order made by the Maharashtra Revenue tribunal purportedly under Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (the "tenancy Act"). It says that the present appellant was not in unauthorised occupation of the land in question and was, therefore, not liable to be evicted under Section 120 of the said Act.

(2.) The High court by the impugned judgment found that the appellant had not produced any evidence showing that the land in question was in his possession or that he was a deemed tenant. The High court further held that before the Revenue tribunal constituted under the Ceiling Act the appellant had not produced any evidence in support of his title or possession respecting the land in question.

(3.) It is not clear to us either from the records of the arguments to the bar whether or not Ex. P-l had been brought to the notice of thetribunal constituted under the Ceiling Act. It is also not clear whether Annx. P-l was considered by either the tribunal or the High court, assuming that that order was relied on by the appellant, for final determination of the question under the Ceiling Act. This is an important aspect which has to be considered. It does not appear from the impugned judgment that sufficient reliance has been placed by the appellant on Annx. P-l in the proceedings under the Ceiling Act.