TUKARAM MARUTI DUBAL Vs. TATYA KHASHABA KHANDAGALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for the parties agree that both these petitions can be disposed of with a common judgment and order.

(2.) The writ petition no. 4704 of 1991 has been instituted by the landlord of the suit property, questioning inter alia the orders dated 10 October 1978 and 29 April 1991 made by the Tenancy Aval Karkoon (AK) and the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (MRT) dismissing the landlord's application for recovery of possession of the suit property on the ground of bonafide requirement for personal cultivation in terms of Section 33B of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 (Tenancy Act).

(3.) The writ petition no. 3894 of 1991 has been instituted by the tenants questioning the orders dated 27 August 1974, 20 January 1990 and 29 April 1991 made by the AK, Sub Divisional Officer ( SDO) and the MRT ordering the eviction of the tenants on the ground of default in payment of rents for three years, in terms of Section 25 of the Tenancy Act.