PRASHANT HARIBHAU DALVI Vs. GOVIND RAMCHANDRA SAPTARSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these writ petitions, the Petitioners are challenging the order dtd. 6/9/2018 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune Bench, Pune in Revision Application No. P/IV/2/2016.

(2.) The facts giving rise to these petitions are as follows. The dispute is about agricultural land bearing Survey No. 160/1, admeasuring 92 R, situated at Village Hadapsar, Pune, which is referred to as the suit property. According to the Petitioners, their ancestor, Shri Namdeo Mahadu Dalvi, was cultivating the suit property as a tenant before 1/4/1957. Therefore, under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, he became a protected tenant and was also treated as a deemed purchaser of the land. It is their case that Mutation Entry No. 4449 dtd. 12/10/1953 also recorded the name of Shri Namdeo Mahadu Dalvi as the tenant in the revenue records. In the year 1957, the original landlord filed Application No. 1267 of 1957 under Sec. 31 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 against Shri Namdeo Mahadu Dalvi. By an order dtd. 24/1/1959, the landlord was allowed to recover possession of half portion of the suit property. However, this was made subject to the condition that the land should be put to non-agricultural use within the prescribed time. According to the Petitioners, the landlord did not fulfil this condition. Thereafter, on 19/1/1960, Shri Namdeo Mahadu Dalvi passed away. After his death, Mutation Entry No. 5384 dtd. 13/2/1960 was recorded. By this entry, the names of his legal heirs, namely Shankar, Haribhau, Shevantabai, Anandibai, Jayavantibai and Parubai, were entered in the "Other Rights" column of the Record of Rights as his legal heirs, and the same was reflected in the 7/12 extract. Later, on 3/3/1962, the limits of the Pune Municipal Corporation were extended, and because of that, the suit property came within the municipal limits.

(3.) On 14/2/1964, the Agricultural Lands Tribunal, Hadapsar, passed an order in Case No. ALT/III/Hadapsar/64 holding that the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 were not applicable because the land had come within the municipal limits. After this order, Mutation Entry No. 6433 dtd. 30/3/1964 was made, by which the names of the tenant's legal heirs were removed from the revenue records. According to the Petitioners, this was done without giving any notice either to the tenant or to his legal heirs. Many years later, on 29/9/2007, the Petitioners filed Tenancy Appeal No. 2003 of 2007 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Haveli Division, Pune under Sec. 74 of the Act. They challenged the order passed in the year 1964 and also filed an application requesting that the delay in filing the appeal be condoned.