TANBAJI MADHOJI CHAGRE Vs. NATHOBA JANBAJI DONGRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners claiming to be the deemed tenants of several field snumbering seven, being fields Nos. 85, 89/2, 86, 97, 84/3, 92 and 95, all situated at mouza Thanegaon, in district Wardha, question the validity of the order made tby the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on July 9, 1969 by which that Tribunal found tha thtese petioners had not made out any case for a declaration that they were the deemed tennats under the provisions of the bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act ).

(2.) AS far as this case is concerned it appears, the ownership of aldns is not in dispute and it si stated in the applciaiotn filed by htese persons that respondent No. 2 Nathoba is the Karta of the Hindu joint family consisting of the other members. It does apepar that these respondednts filed Civil Suit No. 98 of 1965 in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Divison, Arvi, wherein the present petitioners raised a plea of tenancy and the matter was referred under Section 125 of the Act. On June 23, 1967, these petitioners filed an applicaiton before the Additional Tahsildar (Tenancy) in the very same proceedings claiming a declaration under Section 100 (2) in the tersm that they are deemed tenants fo the land under Section 6 of the Act. That was also the issue referred for decision to the tenancy authorities by the Civil Court.

(3.) IT may be brieftly noted that hte case of the petitioners had been that all these lands were leased out to them initially in the month of June, 1966 upon payment of Rs. 200 in advance as lease-money. After about some time the respondents approached them and entered into an agreement of sale for the total sum of Rs. 4,000/- and Rs. 200/- were adjusted. It is specifically averred in the application produced at Annexure 1 that the applicants cultivated the land accordingly in 1964-65 and took all the crop. This cultivation is after the agreemtn of sale betweent eh parties and after adjustment of Rs. 200/- as is pleaded by the present petitioners. To this the plea of the respondent as can be gathered from Annexure D. i. e. the written statement filed in thse proceedings, was that for the year 1964-65 the land was cultivatted by the applicants and non-applicant in partnership and the non-applicants had actually incurred the expenditure in half and half ratio for the cultivation of the fields right form summer operation till the harvesting of the crop. Time and again, non-applicant No. 2 had advanced amounts for the purpose of cultivation; Radhabai, the motehr of the non-applicants used to stay at Thanegaon for the supervision of the cultivation on behalf of the non-applicants. It is further pleaded that fterwardds the possession of the applciants was that of rank trespassers, for they hihg-handedly and wrongfully usurped the same in themonth of July, 1965. substantially, therefore, the pleas were that after 1964-65 the petitioners were rank trespassers with respect to the land. For the year 1964-65 threr had been sharing of expenditure and profits in cultivation and the parties had agreed to cultivate the same as partners.