CIVIL v. Kashiram Sonu Karabele
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Application stands disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Having considered the rival submissions, . Having considered the rival submissions, . Having considered the rival submissions, I have no hesitation in taking the view that the I have no hesitation in taking the view that the I have no hesitation in taking the…
Judgment
Mr. P.N. Karlekar, for the Mr. P.N. Karlekar, for the Petitioner. Petitioner. Mr. P.N. Karlekar, for the Petitioner. Mr. S.B. Shetye, for Respondents Mr. S.B. Shetye, for Respondents Mr. S.B. Shetye, for Respondents Nos. 1, 2-A to 2-C, 3 and 4. Nos. 1, 2-A to 2-C, 3 and 4. Nos. 1, 2-A to 2-C, 3 and 4. Mr. Ketan G. Mr. Ketan G. Phadke, for Respondents Nos. Phadke, for Respondents Nos. Mr. Ketan G. Phadke, for Respondents Nos. 5 and 6. 5 and 6. 5 and 6. ... ... ... CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. 25th June 2004 25th June 2004 25th June 2004 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. . Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. . Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. :2: Mr. Shetye and Mr. Phadke waive notice for the Mr.
Shetye and Mr. Phadke waive notice for the Mr. Shetye and Mr. Phadke waive notice for the respective Respondents. As short question is respective Respondents. As short question is respective Respondents. As short question is involved, this petition is taken up for final involved, this petition is taken up for final involved, this petition is taken up for final disposal forthwith by consent. disposal forthwith by consent. disposal forthwith by consent. . This petition under Article 227 of the 2. This petition under Article 227 of the . This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the Constitution of India takes exception to the Constitution of India takes exception to the judgment and order passed by the Maharashtra judgment and order passed by the Maharashtra judgment and order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Mumbai, dated December 1, 1999, Revenue Tribunal, Mumbai, dated December 1, 1999, Revenue Tribunal, Mumbai, dated December 1, 1999, in Revision No.
Ten.R.A. 169 of 1998. The in Revision No. Ten.R.A. 169 of 1998. The in Revision No. Ten.R.A. 169 of 1998. The present proceedings have emanated from the present proceedings have emanated from the present proceedings have emanated from the inquiry under section 32G of the Bombay Tenancy inquiry under section 32G of the Bombay Tenancy inquiry under section 32G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (for short, "the Act") and Agricultural Lands Act (for short, "the Act") and Agricultural Lands Act (for short, "the Act") for determination of purchase price in respect of for determination of purchase price in respect of for determination of purchase price in respect of the suit land. The first authority, by order the suit land. The first authority, by order the suit land. The first authority, by order dated October 31, 1996, fixed the purchase price dated October 31, 1996, fixed the purchase price dated October 31, 1996, fixed the purchase price in respect of the suit land, against which the in respect of the suit land, against which the in respect of the suit land, against which the Petitioner carried the matter in appeal before Petitioner carried the matter in appeal before Petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer, who, in turn, the Sub-Divisional Officer, who, in turn, the Sub-Divisional Officer, who, in turn, dismissed the appeal by judgment and order dated dismissed the appeal by judgment and order dated dismissed the appeal by judgment and order dated July 6, 1998.
The Petitioners then carried the July 6, 1998. The Petitioners then carried the July 6, 1998. The Petitioners then carried the matter in revision before the Tribunal, which has matter in revision before the Tribunal, which has matter in revision before the Tribunal, which has been dismissed by the impugned judgment and order been dismissed by the impugned judgment and order been dismissed by the impugned judgment and order dated December 1, 1999. dated December 1, 1999. dated December 1, 1999. :3: . The main grievance of the Petitioner is 3. The main grievance of the Petitioner is . The main grievance of the Petitioner is that the Respondents-tenants are not entitled to that the Respondents-tenants are not entitled to that the Respondents-tenants are not entitled to purchase the suit land in excess of their purchase the suit land in excess of their purchase the suit land in excess of their entitlement in terms of the ceiling area as entitlement in terms of the ceiling area as entitlement in terms of the ceiling area as provided under section 32A of the Act.
However, provided under section 32A of the Act. However, provided under section 32A of the Act. However, the authorities below have negated that argument the authorities below have negated that argument the authorities below have negated that argument on the reasoning that the issue is no more open on the reasoning that the issue is no more open on the reasoning that the issue is no more open as the Respondents-tenants are entitled to as the Respondents-tenants are entitled to as the Respondents-tenants are entitled to purchase the suit land to the extent of half purchase the suit land to the extent of half purchase the suit land to the extent of half portion in terms of the compromise arrived at portion in terms of the compromise arrived at portion in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties before this Court in Special between the parties before this Court in Special between the parties before this Court in Special Civil Application No. 1094 of 1959 as recorded Civil Application No. 1094 of 1959 as recorded Civil Application No. 1094 of 1959 as recorded on 30th January 1960. on 30th January 1960. on 30th January 1960.
Having considered the rival submissions, . Having considered the rival submissions, . Having considered the rival submissions, I have no hesitation in taking the view that the I have no hesitation in taking the view that the I have no hesitation in taking the view that the approach of the authorities below is manifestly approach of the authorities below is manifestly approach of the authorities below is manifestly wrong. Indeed, the parties arrived at compromise wrong. Indeed, the parties arrived at compromise wrong. Indeed, the parties arrived at compromise before this Court as is correctly noted by the before this Court as is correctly noted by the before this Court as is correctly noted by the authorities below. Nonetheless, when the authorities below. Nonetheless, when the authorities below. Nonetheless, when the question of deciding the issue of the tenants question of deciding the issue of the tenants question of deciding the issue of the tenants having become deemed purchasers in respect of the having become deemed purchasers in respect of the having become deemed purchasers in respect of the portion of the suit land arose, it was obligatory portion of the suit land arose, it was obligatory portion of the suit land arose, it was obligatory on the part of the authorities to ascertain on the part of the authorities to ascertain on the part of the authorities to ascertain whether the land held by the tenants was or was whether the land held by the tenants was or was whether the land held by the tenants was or was :4: not in excess of the ceiling area and conform to not in excess of the ceiling area and conform to not in excess of the ceiling area and conform to the requirements of section 32A of the Act.
It the requirements of section 32A of the Act. It the requirements of section 32A of the Act. It is only to the extent of the permissible ceiling is only to the extent of the permissible ceiling is only to the extent of the permissible ceiling area the tenants would be entitled to purchase area the tenants would be entitled to purchase area the tenants would be entitled to purchase the suit lands as deemed purchasers by virtue of the suit lands as deemed purchasers by virtue of the suit lands as deemed purchasers by virtue of that provision, compromise decree or order of a that provision, compromise decree or order of a that provision, compromise decree or order of a court of competent jurisdiction inter se the court of competent jurisdiction inter se the court of competent jurisdiction inter se the parties notwithstanding. The ceiling area is parties notwithstanding. The ceiling area is parties notwithstanding.
The ceiling area is prescribed in section 5 of the Act. This inquiry prescribed in section 5 of the Act. This inquiry prescribed in section 5 of the Act. This inquiry has not been undertaken by the authorities below, has not been undertaken by the authorities below, has not been undertaken by the authorities below, for which reason the appropriate course is to set for which reason the appropriate course is to set for which reason the appropriate course is to set aside all the orders, which are subject matter of aside all the orders, which are subject matter of aside all the orders, which are subject matter of challenge in this petition and to relegate the challenge in this petition and to relegate the challenge in this petition and to relegate the parties before the Tahsildar, who, in turn, shall parties before the Tahsildar, who, in turn, shall parties before the Tahsildar, who, in turn, shall examine the issue in the context of the examine the issue in the context of the examine the issue in the context of the requirement of section 32A read with section 5 of requirement of section 32A read with section 5 of requirement of section 32A read with section 5 of the Act.
The Tahsildar shall also examine the the Act. The Tahsildar shall also examine the the Act. The Tahsildar shall also examine the contention of the tenants that each of the contention of the tenants that each of the contention of the tenants that each of the tenants are entitled to separate share and tenants are entitled to separate share and tenants are entitled to separate share and possession in which case their holding does not possession in which case their holding does not possession in which case their holding does not exceed the ceiling area. That question be exceed the ceiling area. That question be exceed the ceiling area. That question be examined in accordance with law. All questions examined in accordance with law. All questions examined in accordance with law. All questions in relation to the entitlement of the tenants to in relation to the entitlement of the tenants to in relation to the entitlement of the tenants to purchase the suit lands having regard to section purchase the suit lands having regard to section purchase the suit lands having regard to section 32A read with section 5 of the Act are left open 32A read with section 5 of the Act are left open 32A read with section 5 of the Act are left open :5: to be decided by the tenancy authority.
The to be decided by the tenancy authority. The to be decided by the tenancy authority. The Tenancy authority to decide the proceedings as Tenancy authority to decide the proceedings as Tenancy authority to decide the proceedings as expeditiously as possible preferably within six expeditiously as possible preferably within six expeditiously as possible preferably within six months from the date of receipt of writ of this months from the date of receipt of writ of this months from the date of receipt of writ of this Court. Parties to extend necessary co-operation Court. Parties to extend necessary co-operation Court. Parties to extend necessary co-operation to the tenancy authority for decision on the to the tenancy authority for decision on the to the tenancy authority for decision on the above terms. above terms. above terms. At this stage, Mr. Shetye states that 5. At this stage, Mr. Shetye states that At this stage, Mr.
Shetye states that the Petitioner taking undue advantage of the the Petitioner taking undue advantage of the the Petitioner taking undue advantage of the status quo order granted by this Court is status quo order granted by this Court is status quo order granted by this Court is interfering with the possession of the interfering with the possession of the interfering with the possession of the Respondents-tenants in respect of suit lands. Respondents-tenants in respect of suit lands. Respondents-tenants in respect of suit lands. Mr. Karlekar fairly accepts that the compromise Mr. Karlekar fairly accepts that the compromise Mr. Karlekar fairly accepts that the compromise terms arrived at between the parties before this terms arrived at between the parties before this terms arrived at between the parties before this Court, as referred to above, clearly postulate Court, as referred to above, clearly postulate Court, as referred to above, clearly postulate that possession of half portion of the suit lands that possession of half portion of the suit lands that possession of half portion of the suit lands is made over to the tenants absolutely.
If it is is made over to the tenants absolutely. If it is is made over to the tenants absolutely. If it is so, the status quo order would mean that the so, the status quo order would mean that the so, the status quo order would mean that the tenants, who are in possession by virtue of the tenants, who are in possession by virtue of the tenants, who are in possession by virtue of the compromise terms, would be entitled to cultivate compromise terms, would be entitled to cultivate compromise terms, would be entitled to cultivate the suit lands till appropriate orders are passed the suit lands till appropriate orders are passed the suit lands till appropriate orders are passed by the tenancy authority in accordance with law. by the tenancy authority in accordance with law. by the tenancy authority in accordance with law. . Writ Petition succeeds as indicated 6. Writ Petition succeeds as indicated . Writ Petition succeeds as indicated :6: above.
Operative part
Rule made absolute with no order as to above. Rule made absolute with no order as to above. Rule made absolute with no order as to costs. costs. costs. . In view of the above order, Civil 7. In view of the above order, Civil . In view of the above order, Civil Application stands disposed of. Application stands disposed of. Application stands disposed of. . All concerned to act on the copy of this 8. All concerned to act on the copy of this . All concerned to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Court order duly authenticated by the Court order duly authenticated by the Court Stenographer of this Court. Stenographer of this Court. Stenographer of this Court. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.)
(A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Application stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227; Agricultural Lands Act.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.