YESHWANT GOVIND BOTRE Vs. SADASHIV MAHADEV MORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India arises in view of the proceeds 32-F and 32-G of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short Bombay Tenancy Act) in the following facts :

(2.) One Haribai Vitthal Gosavi was landlady of the lands S. No. 81/3 admeasuring (2-A-16 gs), S.No. 80/2, admeasuring (1-A-5-Gs) and S. No. 113/1 (admeasuring 1-A-5-gs) situated at village Yelvadi, Taluka Khed, District Pune. The petitioner was the tenant thereof on tiller's day i.e. 1-4-1957 and many years prior thereto. However, as she was a widow, tiller's day was postponed by order dated 19-2-1960 by A.L.T. Khed. She died on 11-5-1973. She was staying at different village near Pandharpur (Solapur District). She was having no near relation i.e. son or daughter. No intimation was given to the village officer regarding her death. The respondents who are her husband's brother's sons, for the first time given information to the village officer of Yelvadi in writing on 5-7-1975 and for the lands in their favour. Accordingly mutation entry No. 180 was made on 6-12-1975. It came to be certified on 26-4-1976. The information thereof was given by them to the petitioner by letter dated 25-5-1976 to all these heirs with a copy to the Tribunal that he wanted to exercise right of purchase. There is no dispute that they have received the notice.

(3.) Proceedings under section 32-G read with section 32-F of Bombay Tenancy Act were started. A contention was raised that the petitioner has lost his right to purchase land in view of section 32-F(1-A) as he has not given notice within period of 2 years from the date of death of the landlady. On the contrary it was contended on behalf of the petitioner that mutation was effected on 6-12-1975 and certified on 26-4-1976 and he received the notice thereof on 21-5-1976 from respondents and therefore he has exercised the right within a period of one year from that date and he was entitled to purchase. The Additional Tahasildar and A.L.T. Khed accepted the contention of the petitioner and held that he was entitled to purchase the land and fixed the purchase price under section 32-G.