AZAM SHAH Vs. M R TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will also dispose of Special Civil Applications Nos. 35 and 43 of 1963 arising out of the same order. The latter two petitions are, however, not pressed and are dismissed with costs.

(2.) SPECIAL Civil Application No. 435 of 1962 is filed by one Azimsha. Azimsha was a tenant of field survey No. 35, having a total area of 28 acres and 29 gunthas. One Pandurang was a tenant of field survey No. 231/1. Azimsha was inducted on land as tenant in the year 1954-55, whereas Pandurang became a tenant in 1951-52. Both these fields along with some property was part of a joint family property, of which one Vasantrao and his mother Manorambai (respondent No. 4 in this petition) were members. There were other persons who had interest in this property. One Indirabai commenced a suit for partition and separate possession of her share in the joint family property (Civil suit NO. 10-A of 1944) in the Civil Court. To this suit Shripatrao (husband of respondent No. 4 Manoramabai and father of Vasantrao) was a party. Ultimately a final decree for partition was passed in that suit as a result of division of property made by the collector on foot of a preliminary decree. The fields which were the subject-matter of the proceedings before the Revenue authorities in these cases seemed to have been allotted to the share of the branch of the deceased Shripatrao in that partition. Thereafter a partition took place between Vasantrao and his brother as well as Manoramabai and her co-widow, on foot of a registered partition deed dated 27th March 1959. This document describes a partition having been effected among the four members in respect of their joint ancestral property. At this partition of 1959 14 acres and 14 1/2 gunthas of land from eastern side of survey No. 35 were allotted to respondent No. 4 Manoramabai. Five acres of land in survey No. 231/1 were also allotted to respondent No. 4. Manoramabai gave a notice purporting to act under Section 38 of the new Tenancy Act to both Azimsha and Pandurang, terminating the tenancy of the lands in their possession to the extent of the share allotted to Manoramabai. On the basis of these notices separate applicatioins seem to have been filed by Manoramabai before the Tahsildar under Section 36 of the new Tenancy Act. The Revenue case against Azimsha was registered as Revenue case No. 449/59 (6)/1959-60 of mouza Galvi, taluq and district Yeotmal. By an order dated 26th October 1960, the Tahsildar held that Manoramabai would be entitled to acquire only 7 acres and 7 1/2 gunthas of land from survey No. 35 cultivated by the petitioner Azimsha. Similarly, the Tahsildar granted 2 1/2 acres of land out of survey No. 231/1. cultivated by Pandurang.

(3.) AGAINST these orders both the tenants as well as respondent No. 4 Manoramabai filed appeals before the Sub-Divisional Officer. All the appeals were heard together and the Sub-Divisional officer came to the conclusion that Manoramabai was entitled to possession of whole of the area in possession of each tenant. He therefore dismissed the appeals filed by Azimsha and Pandurang and allowed the appeals of Manoramabai.