SAGARU LAXMAN SHINDE Vs. MUKUND SHANKAR KURLEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, Petitioners have challenged the order dtd. 19/11/1997 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune allowing Revision Application No. MRT.SS.101/1991 filed by the Respondents and setting aside the judgment and order dtd. 28/2/1991 passed by the Assistant Collector, Walwa, DistrictSangli. The Assistant Collector in turn had allowed the Appeal preferred by the Petitioners and while setting aside the order dtd. 13/5/1988 passed by the Tehsildar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal, Khanapur, had directed fixation of purchase price of the land by recognizing the right of the Petitioners to purchase the same. Petitioners are thus aggrieved by the decision of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in not recognizing their right to purchase the tenanted land under the provisions of Sec. 32G read with Sec. 32F of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (the Act).

(2.) Land bearing Survey No. 285/1 admeasuring 4 Hectares 35 Ares plus 3 Ares pot-kharaba situated at Village-Devarashtra, TalukaKhanapur, District-Sangli is the subject matter of controversy in the present petition, which is hereinafter referred to as 'the tenanted land'. One Shankar Govind Kurlekar was the owner of the tenanted land. It appears that a registered Partition Deed was executed on 4/8/1956, under which the tenanted land came to the share of Shankar's sons, Mukund Shankar Kurlekar (Mukund) and Raosaheb alias Rajabhau Shankar Kurlekar (Raosaseb). Thus, on the Tiller's Day of 1/4/1957, Mukund and Raosaheb had become owners of the tenanted land. The names of Mukund and Raosaheb were mutated to the revenue records in respect of the tenanted land vide Mutation Entry No. 2899 certified on 8/4/1957. Shankar apparently passed away in the year 1960. Petitioners' predecessor filed proceedings under the provisions of Sec. 32G of the Act in the year 1963. In those proceedings, statements of the tenant were recorded on 8/2/1963 and 23/2/1963 in which he stated that Mukund and Raosaheb were minors and therefore fresh proceedings would be initiated by issuing notice to them after attaining the age of majority. On account of this statement being made by the tenant, the ALT dropped proceedings initiated in the year 1963 observing that right of the tenant to purchase the tenanted land was postponed till expiry of the period mentioned in Sec. 32F(1) of the Act. As a matter of fact, Mukund had already attained majority on 8/2/1960, his date of birth being 8/2/1942. Raosaheb attained majority on 18/2/1964, his date of birth being 18/7/1946.

(3.) It appears that after attaining the age of majority by Raosaheb on 18/2/1964, neither any notice was issued by the tenant nor proceedings were initiated expressing intention to purchase the tenanted land for a considerable period of time. The application for fixation of purchase price of the land under the provisions of Sec. 32G of the Act was filed on 4/12/1986 by Sagaru Laxman Shinde (the tenant). The ALT conducted an enquiry and proceeded to reject the application for fixation of purchase price holding that the tenant had failed to issue notice within a period of 2 years of attaining the majority by the landlord and that therefore the tenant lost right to purchase the tenanted land under Sec. 32F of the Act. The ALT accordingly refused to fix the purchase price holding that purchase of the tenanted land by the tenant had become ineffective and directed that the proceedings under Sec. 32P of the Act be initiated for return of the land to the landlords by making mutation entries in the records of rights. The ALT's order dtd. 13/5/1988 was challenged by the tenant by filing Tenancy Appeal No. 3/1988 before the Assistant Collector, Walwa, District-Sangli under the provisions of Sec. 74 of the Act. The Assistant Collector proceeded to allow the Appeal holding that filing of proceedings for fixation of purchase price of the tenanted land itself amounts to issuance of intimation for purchase of the land by the tenant under the provisions of Sec. 32F of the Act. The Assistant Collector accordingly set aside ALT's order dtd. 13/5/1988 and remanded the proceedings to the ALT for fixation of purchase price of the tenanted land.