SITARAM NARHU KOMBDE Vs. INDUMATI GANESH KHARDEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioners/original opponents are challenging the order dated 10.12.1998 passed by the learned Member of the Maharashtra aaa/- Revenue Tribunal, Pune in Revision No.MRT-AH-II/3 of 1996.

(2.) Brief facts, giving rise to the present writ petition, are as follows :-

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the provisions of section 32-G of the Tenancy Act are not at all attracted, so also the provisions of section 32-P of the Tenancy Act are also not attracted. Learned counsel submits that the possession over the tenanted property was surrendered by the tenant, and thereafter, in the year 1957 itself the petitioner's father had started cultivating the land and as a result of which the petitioners have become the owner by adverse possession. The provisions of the Tenancy Act therefore would not apply. Learned counsel submits that there is no relationship of tenant and landlord existing between the parties. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are in possession and cultivating the suit land. There is a decree passed by the Civil Court in Regular Civil Suit No.164 of 1983, wherein the Civil Court has categorically given the fnding that the petitioners have become the owners by adverse possession. Learned counsel submits that as there is no relationship of landlord and tenant in existence it would not be permissible to initiate proceedings under section 32-P of the Tenancy Act for disposal of the land not purchased by tenant. Learned counsel submits that, the impugned judgment and order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune is thus liable to be quashed and set aside.