DEEPABHAI RANCHHODBHAI Vs. SUTHAR RATILAL MANGALBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was the tenant in respect of I acre27 gunthas of S. No. 878/2 of village Delol in Panchnmahals District. The total area of the land in question is 3 acres-14 gunthas one Ramshankar Lallubhai was the original landlord. He was the certified landlord because he had obtained an exemption certificate under sec. 88C of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 The petitioner was one of his tenants in respect of half the area of the said survey number one Jhalabhai Gorabhai was the tenant in respect of the other half of the said survey number. They were excluded tenants. Ramshankar filed against both these tenants a suit for possession under sec. 32T of the Tenancy Act in 1963. In that suit an order for possession was passed in favour of Ramshankar to whom half the land in possession of each of the two tenants was ordered to be given. It is the case of the petitioner that Ramshankar did not recover possession of half his land from him in pursuance of that order. Sometime thereafter Ramshankar sold the land to the respondent. Both the tenants therefore applied to the Collector on 15th July 1965 under sec. 84 of the Tenancy Act for summary eviction of the respondent. The Assistant Collector inquired into the matter recorded the conclusion against the respondent and ordered him to be summarily evicted from 1 acre-27 gunthas of the land in question. The respondent challenged that order in a revision application which he filed before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal. The Revenue Tribunal allowed the revision application set aside the order of summary eviction and dismissed the original application made by the petitioner.

(2.) It is that order which is challenged by the petitioner in this petition.

(3.) The Revenue Tribunal has on appreciation of evidence recorded the finding that in 1963-64 the tenants had handed over possession of I acre-27 gunthas of land to Ramshankar. Therefore when order for possession was passed against them by the Mamlatdar they agreed that possession handed over by them to Ramshankar of 1 acre-27 gunthas of land should be treated as possession taken by Ramshankar in execution of the order for possession passed in his favour. The petitioner also agreed that his name should be deleted from the record in respect of the land of which possession had been given to Ramshankar. The finding recorded by the Revenue Tribunal is a pure finding of fact. I cannot interfere with it in this petition filed under Art. 227.