LAXMANRAMJI DESHMUKH Vs. RAJABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this petition is directed against the order dated 8-11-1990 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Nagpur (MRT) in revision application No. Ten. A. 78/86 of Veni Bk. whereby the MRT confirmed the concurrent findings of the learned Sub Divisional Officer in appeal and the Naib Tahsildar rejecting the application filed by the petitioner (deceased Laxman through his legal heirs) under Section 36 (1) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1948 (for short, the Tenancy Act) seeking possession.

(2.) RELEVANT facts are as under : Field survey No. 37/1, area 6. 00 acres at village Veni Buzruk was owned by one Umaji s/o Ramji Deshmukh and the petitioner was said to be a tenant inducted on the land by the said Umaji Deshmukh in the year 1958-59. The petitioner Laxman Ramaji Deshmukh died during the pendency of this petition and his legal heirs have been brought on record. The petitioner cultivated the land till 1962-63 and thereafter Umaji Deshmukh insisted that the petitioner should execute a dharwar chitthi and on his insistence, the petitioner had executed a dharwar chitthi for the consideration of Rs. 1,000/ -. Thereafter the petitioner cultivated the field as tenant. After 1962-63, the petitioner handed over the possession of land to Umaji Deshmukh for personal cultivation, but instead of cultivating the field personally, Umaji Deshmukh let out the field to other tenants, and therefore, the petitioner demanded the possession of the land.

(3.) THE petitioner had filed an application under Section 36 (1) of the Tenancy Act claiming the possession of the land. The learned Naib Tahsildar rejected the application by the order dated 24-10-1966 on the ground that petitioner was not a tenant. The petitioner, being aggrieved by that order, carried appeal No. 178/59 (10-A)/66/67 before the Deputy Collector, Yavatmal. This appeal was allowed on 29-11-1968. Umaji, who is the owner of the disputed land, challenged the order passed by the Dy. Collector, before the MRT by way of revision. The MRT allowed the revision, set aside the order passed by the Dy. Collector and restored the order of the Naib Tahsildar. This order dated 25-3-1970 passed in Revision No. Ten. A. 54/69 was challenged before this Court in Special Civil Application No. 1367/1971, which was allowed by the order dated 13-12-1974 and by that order, the matter was remanded to the Dy. Collector (Tenancy) for fresh decision, in accordance with law. The learned Sub Divisional Officer held enquiry and dismissed the application on the ground that it was not open to the tenant to apply under Section 36 (1) of the Tenancy Act and held that the suit field was acquired by the Government in land acquisition proceedings and the application cannot be entertained. The findings of the Sub Divisional Officer were challenged before the MRT by filing revision application No. Ten. A. 78/86 and the said revision application came to be dismissed confirming the findings of the Sub Divisional Officer. This order dated 8-11-1990 passed by the MRT is challenged in this petition.