LAXMAN RAGHUNATH GALANDE Vs. SHAKUNTALA SHANKARRAO KOLSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition takes exception to the judgment and order dated 24 th December, 1990 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune-1 in Revision Application No. MRT/AH/III/2/88(TNC).B.46/88) arising out of Tenancy Case No.112of 1982 and Tenancy Appeal No. 24 of 1986.

(2.) The Additional Tahsildar, who had conducted the T.C. NO.2/74 ordered disposal of the suit land under Section 32.P(2) of the Tenancy Act. Against that order T.A. NO.34/79 was preferred by the present petitioners i.e. original opponents.

(3.) The same was dismissed. Then the petitioners herein filed revision application No. MRT/AH/III/8/80 before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal which was also dismissed on the ground that there was no second postponement on account of succession by disabled person. This order of the tribunal was challenged by the petitioner herein by way of filing Writ Petition No.2260 of 1985. The said writ petition was summarily dismissed by this Court on 27 th June, 1985. It appears that the said order in Writ Petition No. 2260 of 1985 attained finality. 3. The respondents herein filed an application4 before the Tahsildar, which was registered as TC No.112/1982 and by his judgment and order dated 31 st January, 1986, the Tahsildar held that the provisions of section 32-P of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short, referred to as the Tenancy Act ) are not applicable and therefore, the said application was held to be not tenable. Being aggrieved by the said order, the respondents herein preferred Appeal No.24/86 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Sangamner, who confirmed the said judgment and order of the Tahsildar. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, revision application was filed before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. The Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal held that both the authorities have erroneously held that the provisions of Section 32-P of the Tenancy Act are not applicable. It is further held that in view of the fact that earlier revision application has been dismissed, in which it was held that the land should be disposed of under Section 32-P(2) of the Tenancy Act and therefore, both the authorities ought not to have held that the provisions of section 32-P are not applicable. It appears that being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the appellate authority in Appeal No.23/1986 and 24/1986, the respondents herein filed revision application No.MRT/AH/III/1/88 which had arisen out of the proceedings of T.C. NO.149/82 started by the applicants for possession of the suit land bearing Gat No.226/1C admeasuring 5 H 59 R of village Wasi under Puntamba, Taluka Kopargaon, under Section 31 of the Tenancy Act. This tenancy case was decided by the Additional Tahsildar, Kopargaon on 31 st January, 1986 by disallowing the application of the landlord for possession. The said order was challenged in appeal in T.A. No.23/86. The same was dismissed on 4.9.1987 and against the said order, Revision No.MRT/AH/III/1/88 was preferred. Similar revision application No. MRT/AH/III/2/88 arose out of the proceedings started by the applicants in T.C. No.112/82 for possession of suit land under Section 32-P of the Tenancy Act. The said case was decided by the Tahsildar, Kopargaon by order dated 31 st January, 1986. The application of the applicants was dismissed by6 the said order. The applicants preferred T.A. NO.24/1986 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Sangamner. This T.A. NO.24/86 and T.A. No.23/86 were dismissed by common judgment by the Sub Divisional Officer on the same date i.e. 4 th September, 1987. Against this common order passed in T.A. NO.24/86, revision Application No.MRT/AH/III/2/88 was preferred.