JUDGMENT - MADAN, J.- This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenges an order made by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal by which the tribunal held that the application filed by the petitioners and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 under section 84 (Bombay Act No. LXVII of 1948) (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as “the said Act”), was not maintainable

2. The petitioners and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 are owners of half portion of a plot of land bearing Revision Survey Nos. 91 and 92 situate in Kagal Taluka in the District of Kolhapur. It will be convenient to refer here-in after to the petitioners and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 as “the landlords”. In 1953 the landlord leased the said plot of land to one Shankar Krishna Bondre whose heirs and legal representatives are respondents Nos. 5 (a), 5 (c), and 5 (d). It is not disputed that the said lease was for the purpose of cultivation of sugarcane. By a writing dated October 24, 1969, the said Bondre created a sub-lease in respect of the said plot of land in favour of the first respondents, Valubai for a period of ten years for a consideration of Rs. 4,000. It is the case of the landlords that on coming to lear

Click Here to Read the rest of this document