ANIL SHRIPATRAO BADGE Vs. SUNDRABAI MAHADA MALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri S. S. Choudhary, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri V. G. Mete, Advocate for the respondent No. 1 and Smt. Geeta Deshpande, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent No. 3. The respondent No. 2, though served, preferred to remain absent.

(2.) THE judgment and order dated 20-11-1986 passed by the learned Member of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad, in the Appeal No. 102/a/85 Osmanabad is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(3.) THE facts to be narrated in the nut shell, for the purposes of the present dispute, are as under ; on Mahadu Mali resident of Washi, Taluka Bhoom, District Osmanabad, happened to be the original owner and possessor of land Survey No. 988/a, having an area of 2 acres 12 gunthas, situated at the above said village. There does not appear to be any dispute that Mahadu cultivated this land during his life time. However, after his death, name of one of his sons - Savata, came to be recorded as owner of the land in question, inspite of the fact that there being other legal representatives of Mahadu. Those other representatives, as can be read from the record, were Sundrabai wife of Mahadu and two other sons, namely, Gokul and Pandu. However, as narrated earlier, Revenue record indicated name of Savata only. At this stage, this Court is not concerned as to how the name of Savata alone was taken on the record bypassing the names of other legal representatives. The fact remains that Savata was shown to be the owner of land in question.