JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The petitioner is the land holder.
The proceedings are under the Ceiling Act.
The Deputy Collector Land Reforms,District
Osmanabad, as the Ceiling Authority
declared that the petitioner is entitled to hold
108 acres, and an area of 44 acres and 22
gunthas was delimited as surplus. The
petitioner preferred an appeal and the
Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal has dismissed the same.
(2.) The dispute raised in these proceedings before the two authorities and also
before me is about survey No. 12 admeasuring 13 acres and 11 gunthas an survey
No. 35 admeasuring 30acres and 30 gunthas
According to the petitioner these lands
were agreed to be sold to the vendees in the
year 1955. On the basis of an agreement of
sale of 1955 the vendees were put in possession of the lands.
However sale deeds were
not executed till a later date. Sale-deed in
respect of survey No. 35, was executed on
12-7-1955. In fact the sale-deed in respect
of survey No. 12 was executed on 14-12-1966.
In fact the sale-deed in respect of survey
No. 12 is produced, and the sale
transaction in respect of survey No. 35 is
proved by production of revenue extracts
and the affidavit of the vendee.
(3.) Both the authorities have not
considered these transactions as binding on
the State while making the necessary declaration
under the Ceiling Act. The Deputy
Collector was the view that the land holder
was still in constructive possession of the
lands and the sale transactions were in contravention
of the Hydrabad Tenancy and
Agricultural Lands Act 1950. The Member
of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, how
ever, has given different reasons. The fact
that these survey numbers were agreed to
be sold in the year 1955 is not disputed. The
fact that the vendees were put in possession
under the agreement of sale is also not disputed.
But the learned Member says that the
possession of the vendees under the agreement of sale could not be as of an owner.
It is stated that under section 54 of the
Transfer of property Act, agreement of sale
by itself would not create any title in favour of the vendee.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.