In these appeals by special leave the appellant claiming to be a tenant under the Bombay Tenancy Act has impugned the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No.568 of 2000 whereby the High Court affirmed the revisional order passed by the Member, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dated 26.11.1999 whereby he had allowed the Revision Petition filed by the respondent landlord.
The Additional Tahsildar by his Order dated 10th June, 1991 allowed the application and fixed the price of the lands in question which measured 7 hectares and 71 ares.
It held that the partition effected in the family of the tenant in the year 1956 was effected only to defraud and defeat the provisions of the Tenancy Act as well as the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands Ceiling on Holdings Act, 1961.
The respondent landlord preferred an appeal which came to be disposed of by the Sub Divisional Officer, the appellate authority, in Tenancy Appeal No.46 of 1991 by Order dated 22nd May, 1995.
The Appellate Authority companycurring with the finding recorded by the Tehsildar dismissed the appeal.
He, therefore, set aside the order of the Tehsildar as well as the Appellate Authority and declared that the tenant was number entitled to purchase the lands in question.
The landlords then preferred a revision before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune on 31.7.1995 and the said Revision Petition was allowed.
The Tribunal recorded two main findings.
The appellant challenged the order of the Tribunal before the High Court.
