DIGAMBAR ADHAR PATIL Vs. DEVRAM GIRDHAR PATIL DIED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Substitution allowed.

(2.) This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Special Civil Application No. 1097 of 1968 dated April 26, 1972. The respondents filed an application under S. 32G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, (for short, 'the Act') to determine the price payable to the respondents to purchase 8 acres 26 guntas of land which was admittedly in his possession as a tenant. The Tribunal below under the Act found that the respondent No. 1, was in possession of 54 acres of land. In other words, in excess of 48 acres which in the ceiling limit prescribed under the Act. Therefore, he was not entitled to purchase the land in question from the appellant. The High Court found that the conclusion reached by the Tribunals was vitiated by personal law, namely, Hindu Law and also by evidence on record.

(3.) We are concerned in this case with the land held by the respondent's minor son to the extent of 7 acres 34 guntas and the land said to have been allotted to the share of his brother by name, Ram Chander, at a partition between them. The High Court has held that by operation of provisions of S.328, of the Act, the land which the respondent held as an owner and tenant alone should be taken into consideration in determining the area of ceiling limit. The land cultivated by the respondent belonging to his minor son was not as a tenant but as a guardian of his minor son. The land allotted to his brother was evidenced by the entries in the Record of Rights and, therefore, the oral evidence coupled by those entries established that there was a partition between him and his brother Ram Chander and thereby the said land stood excluded. Even assuming that the land belonging to his minor son and cultivated by the respondent was considered to be either held as a tenant or as a member of the joint family, the total land held by the respondent was within the ceiling limit and, therefore, he is entitled to purchase the land of the appellant to the extent of 8 acres 26 guntas cultivated as a tenant by the respondent under S. 32B of Act. Accordingly, it directed the Mamlatdar to conduct the enquiry under S.32G and remanded the matter for fixing the price. Thus this appeal by special leave.