JUDGMENT - D.R. DHANUKA, J.:---This petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have impugned the order dated 24th November, 1987, passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Nagpur in the revision application No. Ten. A. 130 of 1986. This petition raises question relating to interpretation and applicability of section 60 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958. Section 60 of the said Act reads as under :---

"Nothing in sections 38, 39 and 39-A and sections 40 to 44 (both inclusive), 46 to 50 (both inclusive) and section 57 shall apply to lands in the areas within the limits of a municipality constituted under the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922, and within the limits of the City of Nagpur as constituted under the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 excluding the areas of the villages specified in Schedule IV :

Provided that if any person has acquired any right under the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951, the said right shall not be deemed to have been affected by this section."

Thus sections 38, 39 and 39-A and sections 40 to 44, 46 to 50 and section 57 are not applicable to :

(a) lands in the areas within the limits of Municipalities constituted under the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922 and :

(b) lands situated within the limits of the city of Nagpur as constituted under the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 excluding the areas of the villages specified in Schedule IV.

Proviso to section 60 of the said Act is not relevant for our purpose.

2. It must be stated here and now before even summarising the material facts having the bearing on the subject matter of this petition that the lands in question were always situate beyond the limits of Amravati Municipality constituted under the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922. The said lands were not situate within the municipal limits even after the coming into force of the Maharashtra Muncipalities Act, 1955 when the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922 was repealed. It is not disputed that the said lands are situate at Amravati and are not within the limits of city of Nagpur as constituted under the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948, on 15th August, 1983. The said lands formed part of the area of Amravati Municipal Corporation for the first time on constitution of Amravati Municipal Corporation under the provisions contained in the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. In this view of the matter it is obvious to me that section 60 of the above referred Act has no application to the instant case. It is well settled that the provisions contained in the Statute cannot be extended by an analogy and cannot be deemed to have been amended in the absence of actual amendment thereto. It is plain from reading of the said section that as far as Corporation areas are concerned, section 60 of the Act is applicable only to areas which are within the limits of the city of Nagpur as constituted under the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 and no other Corporation whatsoever.

3. The relevant facts have a bearing on the subject matter of this petition are briefly summarised hereinafter:

(a) The petitioners are the agriculturists. They are the legal representatives of one Bhagwandas Gupta (hereinafter referred to as the deceased). The deceased was the father of the petitioners. The deceased was the tenant of the fields bearing Survey No. 46 admeasuring 8 acres 15 gunthas and Survey No. 120 admeasuring 25 acres and 29 gunthas situated at village Naosari, taluka and district Amravati.

(b) The respondent is the owner of the said fields by virtue of the registered partition deed dated 9th October, 1954. On the date of the partition the respondent was a minor. The respondent was born on 9th May, 1952.

(c) Some time in the year 1965-66, suo motu proceedings for transfer of statutory ownership of the said fields to the n

Click Here to Read the rest of this document