NARAYAN GANPAT RAUT Vs. HABIBA YUSUF LANDYE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition raises a question with regard to the scope of section 37 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act and the import of that section.

(2.) The question arises in the following circumstances : ands Survey No. 25 Hissan Nos. 1 and 2 admeasuring 2 Acres and 8 1/2 Gunthas of village Kase in Sangameshwar Taluka, District of Ratnagiri, was leased to Narayan Ganpat as a tenant. Land belonged to respondent-Habiba. Habiba filed a proceeding against Narayan under section 31 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act claiming possession on the ground that she required the land for bona fide personal cultivation. That was Tenancy Suit No. 303 of 1962. It is common ground that Habiba succeeded in that suit and was rewarded with an order of possession of those lands. Accordingly, she was actually put in possession in the year 1964. Since then she has been cultivating this land personally about which there is no dispute.

(3.) On the 9th of April, 1973 Habiba executed a sale deed in favour of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 Ganpat Chavan and Gangubai Chavan, his wife, it appears that as soon as the sale deed was executed and within a few days thereform the parties thought of cancellation of that document. To that effect, on the 13th of May, 1973, an application was given by Ganpat and his wife to the Registrar to cancel that document. It appears that respondents Nos. 2 and 3 were then ready to cancel the document but such a thing could not be done, and the Registrar informed them that if they did not want the land then they had to execute a reconveyance in favour of the Vendor Habiba. Accordingly, a document came to be executed on 29th June, 1973 reconveying the same land by respondents Nos. 2 and 3, namely, Ganpat and his wife in favour of Habiba from who they had purchased this land.