SHAMRAO MARUTI PATIL Vs. SHANTABAI DATTATRAYA SALOKHE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE writ petitions arising out of the orders passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in proceedings initiated under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the Tenancy Act") are between the same parties and involve identical questions of law and fact. As such, all these petitions are taken up together for hearing and disposal.

(2.) WRIT Petition No. 1429 of 1983 :--The petitioners are tenants of a plot of land bearing Survey No. 362/1 (Gat No. 983) admeasuring about 31 acres. The respondent is the landlady. The Additional Tahsildar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal started inquiry under section 32-G of the Tenancy Act in respect of the above land and after hearing the parties, by order dated 7th June, 1975, fixed the purchase price of the said land. Aggrieved by the above order, the landlady applied to the Deputy Collector and Special Land Acquisition Officer (hereinafter referred to as "the Appellate Authority" ). Before the Appellate Authority, it was contended by the landlady that the land in question was leased out to the tenants for sugarcane cultivation and, as such, in view of the special provisions contained in section 43-A of the Tenancy Act, sections 32 to 32-R (including section 32-G) had no application. On the other hand, the contention of the tenants was that the land had not been leased for sugarcane cultivation and, as such section 43-A had no application. The Appellate Authority, on consideration of the facts of the case, arrived at a conclusion that the land in question had been leased out for sugarcane cultivation. While arriving at this conclusion, the Appellate Authority took note of the fact that there was no instrument of lease or Kabulayat between the landlady and the tenants. No rent notes were also produced by either of the parties. Under the circumstances, the Appellate Authority decided the factual controversy in regard to the nature of the lease on the basis of circumstantial evidence. Some of the factors taken into consideration for the purpose by the Appellate Authority are :

(3.) THE tenants went in revision under section 76 of the Tenancy Act to the Tribunal. The Tribunal, on perusal of the statements of the parties and the relevant records, came to the conclusion that the finding of fact recorded by the Appellate Authority in regard to the purpose of the lease was proper and legal and no interference was needed with the said finding. The Tribunal observed that the circumstances were indicative of the fact that the land must have been leased for the purpose of growing sugarcane. The revision petition of the tenants was, therefore, dismissed. Aggrieved by the above order, the tenants have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.