WAMAN SURYABHAN Vs. MAHARASHTRA REVENUE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a tenants' petition under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging an order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal holding that the respondents Nos, 3 and 4 were entitled to restoration of possession of two fields, Survey Nos. 56 and 72/2 of mouza Kasarkhed, tahsil Bala-pur. District Akola. The litigation has had a chequered career and it will be necessary to trace a few facts.

(2.) These two fields were cultivated by Suryabhan who had acquired the rights of a protected lessee under the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951. Digambar the predecessor-in-title of the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 gave a notice under Section 9 (1) of the Leases Act terminating the tenancy of Suryabhan, On the basis of this notice, two proceedings came to be started, one by Suryabhan and another by Digambar. Digambar started proceedings under Section 8 (1) (g) of the Leases Act challenging the order terminating the lease and Suryabhan's application registered as Revenue Case No. 94/59/56-57 in which he challenged the bona fides of the notice under Section 9 (3) of the Leases Act. Both the applications were considered and tried together and disposed of by a common order dated 20-8-1957. A copy of this order was filed in the subsequent proceedings before the Naib-Tahsildar. The Sub-Divisional Officer held that the notice was valid and bona fide. He allowed the application of Digambar and terminated the lease of Survey Nos. 56 and 72/2 under Section 8 (1) (g) of the Leases Act and rejected the application of Suryabhan in Revenue Case No. 94/59/56-57,

(3.) Suryabhan apparently did not file a separate appeal challenging that part of the order under Section 8 (1) (g) of the Leases Act, terminating the lease, but he challenged by an appeal before the appellate authority the decision of the Sub-Divisional Officer holding that the notice was bona fide. This appeal was dismissed in default by the appellate authority. Against this order, Suryabhan preferred a second appeal which was disposed of by the Bombay Revenue Tribunal by its order dated 31-3-1960. The Tribunal held that Suryabhan was not entitled to any reliefs. Thus. Suryabhan's application under Section 9 (S) was finally disposed of by the order of the Tribunal dated 31-3-1960.