Sarkaria, J. - (1.) These anneals by special leave are 'directed against the common judgment, dated 5-10-1967. of the High Court of Bombay dismissing two Writ Petitions filed by the appellants to impugn the orders of Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. The material facts are these:
(2.) On September 8. 1953, the predecessor of appellants 1 and 2 (hereinafter called the landlords) made an application to the Mamlatdar of Miraj. that the tenant (respondent No. 1) was willing to surrender his tenancy in the agricultural land, bearing Survey No. 102/2, admeasuring 8 acres and 22 gunthas, situated at village Haripur, Taluka Miraj, District Sangli in the State of Maharashtra. The landlord prayed that the surrender in his favour should be verified under Section 5 (3) of the Bombay Tenancy Act 67 of 1948. To this application the landlord annexed a letter of surrender bearing the thumb-impression of the tenant. The Mamlatdar did not verify the surrender, or pass any final order in the matter. The landlord's application however came up before Shri Bhokare, the then Circle Officer of Miraj who after recording the statements of the tenant and the landlord. made this order on it. "The applicant and the tenant are present, The tenant Shri Chaware states that the suit land viz S. No. 102/1 measuring 8-22 and assessed at Rs. 44-3-0 of Haripur belongs to the applicant and that he is cultivating the same as a protected tenant. He further adds that he does not want to cultivate the same any longer and so he is surrendering the possession willingly along with crops and also the right as pro-tenant. I, therefore, order that the possession of the suit land should be handed over to the applicant with the crops and the right as pro-tenant should be deleted under Section 29 (i) (3) of the B. T. and A. L. Act 1948. Haripur Bhokare 18-9-53. (M. M. Bhokare) Circle Officer, Sangli."
(3.) Pursuant to the above order, a Panchnama was prepared by the Talati on November 20, 1953 in which it was stated that the possession of this tenancy land had been given to the landlord. The latter executed a Kabje-Pavti to the effect, that he had obtained the possession, Mutation entry No. 431 was also made in this respect in the record of rights of the village and the name of the landlord was entered as kabzedar in actual possession. On April 23, 1959, the landlord sold this land to appellants 3 and 4 and respondents 2 and 3.;