KASHIRAM SHRIRAM DOBLE Vs. MAHARASHTRA REVENUE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS reference raises an important question as to the jurisdiction of the Collector under Section 120 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (Bombay Act No, 99 of 1958), and it arises in this way.

(2.) SURVEY No. 39/1, area 19. 34 -acres of village Wadegaon, District Akola belonged to Madhao, the respondent No. 2 in the petition. On 20th October 1964 Madhao the respondent No. 2 made an application for possession under Section 120 of that Act against Kashiram the present petitioner alleging that he Madhao was cultivating the fields in the years 1962-63 and 1963-64 but that the petitioner Kashiram took unlawful possession without any right in the year 1964-65. Kashiram was merely appointed to help Madhao and his family in the cultivation of the lands and taking advantage of his position he entered into wrongful possession over the lands. The respondent No. 2 alleged that the petitioner was a mere trespasser. The application was filed before the Sub-Divisional Officer Akot who has the powers of the Collector under Section 120.

(3.) IN reply to the application the petitioner contended (1) that he was a tenant and, therefore, in lawful possession. The respondent No. 2 had given -the field to him for cultivation "on batai terms" and the petitioner had accordingly cultivated the same and acquired the rights of a tenant over the same. (2) that the Sub-Divisional Officer had no jurisdiction to evict the petitioner under Section 120 of the Act; (3) that "the applicant (the present respondent No. 2) should first get a suitable order from the Court of the Tahsildar that this N. A. (the petitioner) is not a tenant and it is only then 'that he can make his present application under Section 120. This be treated as preliminary ground and the application be dismissed. To decide whether a person is or Is not a tenant is exclusive jurisdiction of the Tahsildar. "