M.R.CALLA - (1.) The petitioner claims to be an Ex-Talukdar and claims to be the absolute owner of village Khasta situated in Dhandhuka Taluka. Such rights as Talukdars in respect of his Talukdari property were abolished and extinguished by the Talukdari Tenure Abolition Act of 1949. The Act was passed on 24-1-1950 whereby the rights and interest of Talukdars were abolished with effect from 15-8-1950. The petitioner's case is that the land of village Khasta was neither alienated nor unalienated as understood by the Land Revenue Code and the said lands were liable for payment of the land revenue only after 15-8-1950 and prior to that it was liable only for "Jama" which was periodically revised. The petitioner further states that the relation between the petitioner and his tenants were governed by "Dharas" or regulations promulgated by the ancestors of the petitioner from time to time and the earliest one, i.e., presently traced is "Dhara" of S. Y. 1958 dated 12-2-1902. That one Gopalkesari filed Special Civil Application (sic.) No. 104 of 1994 (sic.) against the petitioner's ancestors and two others in the civil Court and on the basis of the available evidence legal rights between the landlord and tenants in Talukdari village of Khasta had been clearly defined and expressly determined by the judgment and decree of the Court on 3-6-1908 (sic.). Reference has also been made in para 5 of the petition to certain other suits and it has been given out that most of these suits were concluded by the consent decree. In 1912 or thereafter leases were executed by each of the tenants at the time and according to the petitioner, the ancestors of predecessors-in-title of the present opponents/defendants had duly renewed the same from time to time last one being in the year 1936 for a period of 15 years which expired in 1951. Thereafter, the opponents-defendants continued as tenants holding over. It is the further case of the petitioner that the Tenancy Act was applied to village Khasta from 15-8-1950 and by 1-4-1957 the opponents predecessor-in-title acquired some rights with respect to the agricultural lands under Sec. 32G and with respect to residential houses under Sec. 16, if they prove that on sites belonging to the landlord the same are built by them, i.e., the tenants or at their expenses. The petitioner through his Advocate gave notice dated 25-2-1963 to all the opponents (their father-husband or ancestor or predecessor-in-title) who was in possession since 1936 as an express licensee of these properties and when they committed and refused and neglected to hand over possession as demanded in the notice on the expiry of the notice period the petitioner filed Regular Civil Suit Nos. 43 of 1963 to 57 of 1963, i.e., in all 15 suits in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.), Dhandhuka against various opponents or their predecessor-in-title. The suits were filed on 1-4-1963 claiming possession of the several properties Kodhs (byre), Wandas, Vadas and open lands in village site. According to the petitioner these properties were not covered by the Tenancy Act.
(2.) The proceedings between the parties were also pending before the Mamlatdar or Agricultural Lands Tribunal with respect to the rights as to the agricultural lands and properties covered by the Tenancy Act in village Khasta and in those proceedings no question is involved or raised or arises with respect to the Kodhs (byre), Vadas and open land situated in village site of Khasta. The defendants filed written statement in the suit and put it on contest. The Civil Judge (J.D.), Dhandhuka framed preliminary issues on 8-11-1963 and held that he had no jurisdiction in matter and passed an order on 22-4-1964 directing the return of the plaint to the petitioner for presentation to the proper Court. The petitioner preferred several appeals from the said order before the learned District Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Narol and the District Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Narol set aside the order dated 22-4-1964 and remanded all the said 15 suits to the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Dhandhuka by his order dated 26-12-1964 with the direction to refer necessary issues to the Tenancy Court for its decision under Sec. 85A of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The Civil Judge (J.D.), Dhandhuka thereafter, reconsidered the matter and passed an order dated 4-8-1964 and referred certain issues as stated in the reference under Sec. 85A dated 4-8-1964 to the Mamlatdar for decision. The issue which was referred by the Civil Judge (J.D.), Dhandhuka to the Mamlatdar by his order dated 4-8-1964 was as under : "Whether the suit properties are dwelling houses or sites of dwelling houses, occupied by agriculturists, or lands falling within clause (b) of Sec. 2(8) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 ?" The Mamlatdar and A.L.T. (No. 2), Dhandhuka on receipt of the said reference issued notice to the parties and various references were numbered as Ref. No. 1 of 1970 to 15 of 1970. Out of these references 1 of 1970 to 15 of 1970 the Mamlatdar took up the Reference No. 11 of 1970 (Suit No. 43 of 1963) as the first matter and notices were issued to the opponents. The opponents filed their written statement and the present petitioner also filed several documents on which they wanted to place reliance including copies of judgments of 1904 and 1908 suits and decrees passed by the Civil Court in some of these suits etc. According to the petitioner the Mamlatdar gave opportunity to the petitioner to lead oral evidence. The evidence was recorded on 1-5-1970 and the judgment was delivered by the Mamlatdar in Reference No. 11 of 1970 on 4-5-1970. The Mamlatdar gave finding that the suits lands were not covered by Sec. 2(8)(b) of the Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 and observed that defendants-tenants are claiming ownership and title even on suit land and the Tenancy Court was not competent to decide the question of title. The Mamlatdar answered all the references in accordance with the finding as aforesaid giving identical finding in all other 14 matters but by separate judgment in each case.
(3.) Against the aforesaid orders passed by the Mamlatdar in 15 references, 15 appeals were preferred before the Deputy Collector, Dholka being Tenancy Appeal Nos. 182 of 1970 to 195 of 1970 and Appeal No. 165 of 1970. All these 15 appeals were heard together and as the common question of law was involved and the same were disposed of by a common judgment and order dated 30-12-1970 passed by the Deputy Collector, Dholka. Thus, all the references made under Sec. 80A of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act were decided.;