Decided on April 18,1972

HARI BALY POTE Respondents


- (1.) THIS petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India raises a rather interesting question of interpretation of Section 32 read with Sections 37 and 39 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
(2.) THE relevant facts are as follows : The petitioner was a tenant of the lands in dispute namely survey Nos. 804/1 to 8, 808/8-9 and 808/10-11 situated in village Sinnar, Taluka Sinnar. He was cultivating the lands on the tillers' day i. e. on April 1, 1957. He continued to cultivate the lands till 1963 when proceedings under Section 32-G were suo motu instituted by the Additional Mamlatdar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal, Sinnar. On the date of hearing, the tenant was absent. An order was passed on October 28, 1963, declaring the statutory purchase of the tenant to be ineffective. Upon a review application the case was heard afresh, after giving notices to the landlord Devidas Balaji Shimpi and one Jaivantabai Bala who died during the pendency of the proceedings and whose heirs therefore were brought on record.
(3.) AT the hearing before the Agricultural Lands Tribunal the landlord supported the tenant-petitioner and admitted that he received rent up to 1959-60 and produced the receipt of Rs. 125/ -. The proceedings were, however, resisted on behalf of the minor heirs of Jaivantabai. They contended that the tenancy of the petitioner was terminated as the landlord has filed an application under Section 29 read with Section 34 as it stood before its amendment by Act 13 of 1956 and also under Section 14 for personal cultivation and on the ground of defaults respectively. An order was passed by the Mamlatdar in those proceedings on July 9, 1956 rejecting the request of the landlord for possession on the ground of non-payment of rent but he granted his application on the ground that the bona fide required the land for personal cultivation. The tenant's appeal before the District Deputy Collector was dismissed on July 23, 1957.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.