DATTU SUBRAO PATIL Vs. DATTATRAYA PANDURANG PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the Special Civil Application No. 861 of 1967 instituted on behalf of the original opponent - tenant, the only contention that is made is that the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, the District Deputy Collector and the Tenancy Awal Karkun who had heard the application of the original applicant - landlord for ejectment of the tenant erred in holding that the provisions of Section 25 (2) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, were applicable to the facts of the case and for that reason the Mamaltdar had no jurisdiction under Section 25 (1) of the Act to make an order directing the tenant to pay arrears of rents within 3 months and that upon such payment to make an order directing that the tenancy had not been terminated.

(2.) IT is stated that in the three next Special Civil Applications on our board the same question has arisen between tenants and landlords. We have, therefore, in this Special Civil Application heard Advocates of landlords and tenants in these three next following Special Civil Applications. We, however, propose to decide the question and arguments advanced by both sides in this Special Civil Application.

(3.) THE short facts leading to the institution of the present Special Civil Application may be stated as follows :-