SHANTABAI DADA KOLI Vs. BHUJGONDA ADAGONDA PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed by the tenant under article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the judgment and order dated 20. 12. 1990 rendered by maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (for short "mrt") by which respondent nos. 1 to 3- landlord's revision has been allowed and the order dated 2. 2. 1987 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer has been set aside. As a result thereof the order dated 10. 9. 1962 passed by the A. L. T. in the proceedings initiated by the landlord under section 29 read with 14, 25 and 32-P of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short "tenancy Act") stood confirmed by the MRT.

(2.) A short yet important question involved in the instant writ petition is as to whether the tenant in possession of Inam Lands, which are governed by the provisions of the Maharashtra revenue Patels (Abolition of Office) Act, 1962 (far short 'act of 1962'), requires to exercise the right conferred under section 32-O of the Tenancy act in the prescribed manner and within the period specified therein, from the date of regrant and if he fails to do so whether such land would vest in the Government and is liable to be disposed of under section 32-P, or if the lease of such land was subsisting on tillers' day, whether the tenant is, straightway, entitled to invoke the provisions of section 32g on such land being regranted in favour of the landlord.

(3.) THESE proceedings arise out of the application filed by respondent nos. 1 to 3 -landlords (for short 'the landlord') on 10. 10. 1977 terminating the tenancy of the petitioner-tenant (for short 'the tenant') by giving notice dated 31. 7. 1974 on the ground of default in payment of rent from the years 1965-66 till 1972-73. It was also contended in the said application that the tenant failed to exercise her right to purchase under section 32-O of the Tenancy Act within one year from the date of regrant of the land in favour of the landlord. Admittedly, the land in question was Inam land and it was governed by the provisions of the Act of 1962. The land was regranted under section 5 of the Act of 1962 to the landlord on payment by him to the State Government of the occupancy price. According to the landlord, since the tenant failed to exercise her right under section 32-O of the Tenancy Act, they filed an application under section 29 read with sections 14, 25 and 32-P of the Tenancy Act seeking possession of the land on the ground of default. Though the contention urged in respect of default was rejected by the ALT vide order dated 10. 9. 1982, he declared the sale ineffective holding that the tenant failed to exercise his right in the prescribed manner and within the period specified in section 32-O.