CHHAGANBHAI NAROTTAMBHAI PATEL Vs. DAHIBEN K PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and challenged the impugned orders passed by the Mamlatdar and ALT, Mahua (Annexure-C) and order passed by the Deputy Collector, Vyara in Tenancy Appeal No.13 of 1985 (Annexure-B) and the order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (for short "Tribunal") dated 27.12.1990 in revision (Annexure-A) whereby all the three authorities have concurrently found against the petitioner-plaintiff that he failed to prove that he was a tenant of the disputed land.

(2.) . In view of the concurrent finding of facts arrived at by all the three courts below against the petitioner, Mr.Shah for the petitioner was not in a position to challenge the impugned orders at Annexures A, B and C passed by the authorities below. However, he requested that the petitioner be permitted to file fresh suit on the strength of enough evidence under Section 70-b of the Bombay Tenancy Act as observed by the learned Mamlatdar in his impugned order Annexure-C.

(3.) . It appears that the petitioner was under reasonable belief that in his application under Section 70-b of the Act he has produced sufficient evidence to declare him as tenant under Section 70-b of the Act, therefore, he carried the impugned order passed by learned Mamlatdar first in appeal before the Deputy Collector and then in revision before the Tribunal, when the learned Collector dismissed his appeal. Not satisfied with the order of Tribunal, he filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as stated earlier.