KEDA KALU WAGH PATIL Vs. DEVIDAS PANDHARINATH METKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Speica Civil Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the concurrent findings and orders of the tenancy authorities and order of the tenancy authorities holding thaht the petitioner had ceased to be a tenant of the land in his possession bearing S. No. 32 of village Khedgaon in Tal. Kalwan of distirct Nasik. On the tillers day i. e. April 1, 1957 the respondent, who is the landlord of the petitioner, was a minor. He attained majority on June 1, 1961. The petitioner-tenant failed to exercise his right to purchase the land before June 1, 1963 as required by Section 32-F of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, as it stood before its amendment by Maharastra Act 49 of 1969.

(2.) UNDER that amendment, whwich came into force on Octoner 18, 1969, a proviso was added to sub-section (IA) -. The said sub-section after the amendment adding the said proviso reads as under:-" (IA) A tenand desirous of exercising the right conferred on him under sub-section (I) shall give an intimation in that behalf to the landlord and the Tribunal in the prescribed manner within the period specified in that sub-section. Provided that, if a tenant holding land from a landlord (who was a minor and has attained majority beforoe the commencement of the Tenancy and Agricultural Lands laws (Amendmnet) Act, 1969) has not given intimation as required by this sub-section but being in possession of the land on such commencement is desirous of exercising the right conferred upon him under sub-section (1), he may give such intimation within a period of two years from the commencement of the Act. " it is not disputed that the petitioner was in possession of the land in dispute on October 18, 1969, when, the Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Laws (Amendment) Act, 1969 came into force. But prior to the amendment, proceedings under Section s 32-F and 32-G wer started by Agricultural Lands Tribunal in 1965. Those proceedings ultimately ended before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on March 2, 1967. The result of the proceedings was that it was declared that the petitioner had losot his rights to purchase the land under Section 32-F and that the land should be surrendered into possession of the landlord under Section 32-P.

(3.) IN spite of the said decision, after the amendment came into force, the petitioner made an application before the Tahildar, Kalwan, under Section 32-G on December 4, 1969, within the time prescribed under the provisoto sub-section (1a) of Section 32-F. In that application, he stated that he was desious of exercisingthe right conferred on him under sub-section (1a) to Section 32-F of purchasing the land and prayed that orders may be issued to the Village Officer to fix the purchase price of the land under Section 32-G. He also requested that orders may be issued to the Village Officer ot stay the handing over of possession of the suit land to the land lord, in pursuance of the order date March 2, 1967 passed by the Maharastra Revenue Tribunal in the earlier proceedings.