Thereafter, one of the heirs of the deceased landowner Narmadabai, named Laxman, preferred an appeal to Appellate Authority against the said order.
The relevant facts leading to the filing of this appeal, as emerging from the case made out by the appellant may be summarized as follows The dispute arose out of the provision of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 hereinafter referred to as the Act relating to the land being Gat No 44, measuring 5 Hectares and 24 Acres in village Malangaon, Kavathe, Mahankal Tahsil of Sangli District in the state of Maharashtra in short the disputed land .
The Bombay High Court by its impugned judgment and order dated 16th of April, 1999, dismissed the said Writ Petition on the ground that the Respondent Ramchandra was the sole owner of the disputed land in pursuance of the letters of administration obtained by him from the Civil Court.
Late Smt.
Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid decision of the High Court, this Special Leave Petition was filed which, on grant of leave, was heard in presence of the learned companynsel for the parties.
After the matter was remanded back to the Additional Tehsilder, again an order affirming the previous position was passed in favour of the tenant under Section 32 G. This time, the other heir of Late Smt.
On 1st of April, 1957, i.e. on the Tillers Day, the Appellant was in cultivation of the disputed land.
Thereafter, the Appellant preferred a revision before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal but the same was dismissed.
Narmadabai, namely Ramchandra, challenged the said order before the Sub Divisional Officer, Miraj, and he again by his order dated 31st of March, 1978, remanded the matter to the Tahsildar for a detailed enquiry and decision on the following points The clear title of the disputed land of the applicant Ramchandra should be enquired.
During the pendency of the Writ Petition before the High Court, Respondent No 2 executed a sale deed of the disputed land and though he was duty bound to inform the Court about this deed, he did number inform the same to the Court.
She died in 1964 leaving behind her two sons Ramchandra and Laxman Bhau Sutar.
The original tenant named Maruti died subsequently in 1994 during the pendency of the Writ Petition in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
Narmadabai who was a widow, was the original landowner of the disputed land.
The original tenant had initiated proceedings under Section 32G of the Act before the Additional Tahsildar, Kavathe Makhanlal, and the case was decided in his favour with the purchase price of the disputed land being fixed.
Being aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal, the Appellant filed a Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court on 28th of December, 1983.
TARUN CHATTERJEE, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and order dated 9th of June, 1999 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition number 4600 of 1983, whereby the High Court had affirmed the decision of the companyrts below.
