SAHEBLAL CHANDBHAI Vs. CHANDANMAL KUNDANMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This special civil application is preferred against the order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dated 24th June 1974 in Revision Application No. MRT. AH. XL 19/73 (TEN. Ap. 490/73). That was a decision given from the decision of the Additional Collector, Ahmednagar, in Tenancy Appeal No. 41 of 1973. The appeal was from the decision of the Agricultural Lands Tribunal, Ahmednagar, in Tenancy Case No. 32 (G) Shendi F/3/73. In the tenancy case the Agricultural Lands Tribunal had started a suo motu inquiry under Section 32G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. In the said inquiry the lands concerned were Survey No. 1 and Survey No. 406 of village Shendi, originally belonging to one Kundanmal Jawaharmal Bhandari The land had been kept fallow for two consecutive years. The Prant Officer, Nagar Division, therefore, assumed management of these two Lands on 20th July 1956. With effect from 14th Oct. 1956 the Lands were leased to one Sheikh Chandbhai for a period of ten years. Under the orders of the Civil Court in Regular Civil Suit No. 401 of 1963, to which the Government was a party, the petitioner before me was permit- ed to continue cultivation of the lands. On 17th Feb. 1965 i. e. before the expiry of the period of ten years from the date on which the lease was to commence, the Prant Officer passed an order under No. WS/II/165 whereby the management of the lands under Section 65 was terminated. The Agricultural Lands Tribunal in the suo motu inquiry and subsequently the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal have taken the view that as the lessee was inducted on the lands while the lands were under the management of the State Government, he would have no right of statutory purchase. It is the correctness of this view that is impugned principally in this special civil application.

(2.) My attention was drawn to a number of decisions of this Court dealing with similar situations. One of these was the decision given by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Chainani C. J. and K. K. Desai J. in Special Civil Appln. No. 1077 of 1961 --Gambhirmal Laxmandas v. Collector of Jalgaon (decided on 20th Dec. 1962) reported in (1966) 14 Tenancy LR 10. In that decision, on the facts set out in the report it would seem to appear that on the date on which the management had been terminated, the tenancy of the lessees inducted during the period of management was not subsisting. The argument, that as the two persons inducted as lessees had been allowed to continue in possession of the land after the period of lease was over, should be regarded as tenants holding over, was negatived. This was in view of the provisions of Section 58. It was on these facts that it was held that there was no tenancy subsisting on the date on which the land was released from management.

(3.) Mr. Lalit relied very strongly on the judgment of Deshpande J, given in Spl. Civil Appln. No. 1185 of 1969 (decided on 19th Nov. 1969). Going through the judgment I do not find any discussion of the position under the Section 88 with which we are concerned and, therefore, the observations to be found therein would have only an indirect bearing on the issue.