Judgment

DESAI, J.:- Two decades have elapsed since the commencement of the proceedings involving a simple issue whether the first respondent designated as certificated landlord is entitled to recover possession of land bearing Survey No. 14/A/2 admeasuring 7 acres and 13 gunthas situated at Village Manjari Badruk Taluka Haveli Distt. Poona in Maharashtra State from appellants 1 to 3 who are heirs of excluded tenant Shri Ghule and appellant No. 4 who is also an excluded tenant.

2. A brief resume of the various proceedings leading to the present appeal may shed some light on a simple issue involved in this appeal.

One Ramchandra Gopal Raykar, father of the first respondent landlord leased land included in Survey No. 14/A/2 to two different persons. Land admeasuring 4 acres out of total area of 7 acres and 13 gunthas was leased to Shri Anaji Maruti Ghule. Appellants Nos. 1 to 3 are the heirs and legal representatives of Sh. Ghule. The remaining 3 acres and 13 gunthas of land was leased to Vishnu Maruti Tilekar appellant No. 4 in this appeal.

3. After a partition in the family of the landlord, the land involved in this appeal fell to the share of the first respondent landlord. He moved an application under Section 88-C of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (Tenancy Act for short) praying for a certificate therein envisaged on the allegation that his holding does not exceed the economic holding and total annual income of the landlord including the rent of such land does not exceed Rs. 1,500/-. After an enquiry made by the Mamlatdar as contemplated by Section 88-C(iii) and (iv) an exemption certificate was granted to the landlord. The order of the Mamlatdar was challenged by the tenants up to the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, but the order of the Mamlatdar granting exemption certificate withstood the challenge. And that order has become final. The effect of the granting of an exemption certificate is that, amongst others, provisions contained in Sections 32 to 32R shall not apply to the land leased by such certificated landlord. In other words, the excluded tenants of such certificated landlord shall not become the owner of the land on the Tillers day i.e. 1st April, 1957.

4. Section 33-B confers a right on the certificated landlord to terminate the tenancy of the land in respect of which exemption certificate is granted, and to make an application to the Mamlatdar for obtaining possession if such certificated landlord bona fide requires such land for cultivating it personally. Accordingly the respondent landlord made an application on March 29, 1962 to the Mamlatdar having jurisdiction in the area praying for an order for possession of the land in respect of which certificate was granted. This application was resisted by both the tenants raising various contentions, one such worth noticing being that appellants Nos. 1 to 3 were not served with the statutory notice as required by Section 33-B. In the meantime, it appears that the land bearing Survey No. 14/A/2 was put to auction to recover arrears of irrigation dues and the same was purchased for a consideration of Re. 1/- by the Govt. Taking note of this fact, the Mamlatdar rejected the application of the landlord observing that he had no title to the land., In an appeal by the landlord, the order of the Mamlatdar was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Mamlatdar for disposal according to law. A revision petition by the appellants was dismissed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. Mamlatdar designated as Tehsildar, on remand held an enquiry, recorded a finding that notice terminating the tenancy was served on present appellant No. 4, but it was not served on appellants Nos. 1 to 3, the heirs of Anaji Ghule. He accordingly allowed the application of the landlord for possession against appellant No. 4 Tilekar but dismissed the same against appellants Nos. 1 to 3, the heirs of Ghule.

5. Four separate appeals came to be filed against the decision of the Tehsi