BHIMRAO Vs. BHAGWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by the consent of the parties.

(2.) This petition challenges the order dtd. 19/7/2017, passed by the learned Member (Judicial) of Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Bench at Pune, in Appeal No. (8/A/2015/B) New No.A/Beed/IV/1/2017, thereby allowing the appeal filed by the respondents and dismissing the application moved by the petitioners for summary eviction of the respondents.

(3.) The predecessors of the petitioners were tenants of the land in question i.e. Gut Nos. 93A, 93AA, 94A, 94AA, 95A and 95AA to the extent of 23 Acres 34 Gunthas at village Massajog, since 1948-1949. The provisions of the Hyderabad Tenancy And Agricultural Lands Act, 1950, (for short, 'the said Act, 1950 ') are applicable to the present case. Name of Mahadu Ramchandra Solunke, the predecessor of the petitioners, was entered in the revenue record as a protected tenant and therefore, he was declared as owner under Sec. 38A and 38E of the said Act, 1950, by order dtd. 17/2/1969, to the extent of 23 Acres 34 Gunthas. Certificate of ownership was issued by the competent authority in the name of Mahadu after he deposited price of the land. Accordingly Mutation Entry No.138 was certified therein recording Mahadu 's name as owner of the land in question.