ANNA BABU SUL Vs. LAXMAN PANDURANG TIWATNE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners challenge the order passed in revision by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in proceedings No. MRT. SH. VI. 6/81 (TEN. B. 185/81) : Pune dated 13th April, 1983 wherein the revision application filed by respondents Nos. 2 to 5 is allowed and the order passed by the Appellate Authority is set aside restoring the order passed on 30th November 1977 wherein the right of respondent Nos. 2 to 5 under section 32-G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1984 has been recognised.

(2.) A few facts of this case are necessary for the purpose of disposal of this writ petition : one Dagadu Ramji Raut was the original owner of the land comprising Survey No. 27/11 (Gat No. 215) admeasuring 1 H. 76 R. in Jalabhavi village, Taluka Malsiras, District Solapur. It appears that he sold the land to Laxman Pandurang Tiwatne who is the 1st respondent in this petition. Interestingly, the 1st respondent again gave the land back to Dagadu Ramji Raut and allowed him to possess and cultivate the land as a tenant. This was done in 1952-53. Admittedly, therefore, Dagadu Ramji Raut was the tenant till his death on 9th January, 1956. On his death, his son-respondent No. 2 was cultivating the land and his name was entered into Revenue Records. Subsequently, 32-G proceedings have been initiated in favour of the tenants. The said proceedings are stated to have been "declared ineffective" for the reasons that the tenant remained absent on 1st May, 1966.

(3.) IN that event, the landlord filed application under section 32-P of the Act for possession of the property. On 9th December, 1969, the application filed by the landlord was ordered. The tenants--- respondents Nos. 2 to 5 --- filed an appeal against both the orders, viz. , invalidating the proceedings under section 32-G and also the order passed under section 32-P of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. As per the order dated 26th September, 1970, the appeal filed by tenants was allowed and the order passed on 1st May 1966 and 9th December, 1969 were set aside and the matter has been remanded back with a direction to proceed with matter under section 32-G of the Act. In the meantime, on 4th August, 1967, the landlord executed sale deed in favour of the present petitioners. The case of the petitioners is that by virtue of sale deed, they came to be in possession of the land.