JUDGMENT - A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.:---This writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India is directed against the judgment passed by M.R.T., Pune dated 12-8-1986.

2. Briefly stated, the petitioner was the tenant in respect of agricultural land bearing Survey No. 563/2+3 situated at Indapur, District Pune. The petitioner was inducted as a tenant in the suit land prior to 1953 by the original owner Shaikh Jamal Shaikh Mohiddin and Shaikh Amil Ahmeaja Shaikh Hussain. Shaikh Amir A. Shaikh Hussain is the respondent herein. It is common ground that the petitioner was cultivating the suit land as a tenant on the tiller's day i.e. 1-4-1957. By virtue of the provisions of B.T. A.L. Act, the petitioner, being deemed tenant, became deemed purchaser in respect of the suit land. It is the case of the respondent that partition was effected by the landlords inter se some time on 30-12-1957. In the said partition, it is stated that the suit lands came to the share of the respondent herein. It is relevant to point out at this stage that respondent is a Muslim by religion. In the circumstances, he cannot be said to have a pre-existing right in the suit land. That the respondent is the grand son of the original owner. Interestingly, no share has been given to the respondent's father, which circumstance is inexplicable. Moreover the partition deed does not indicate that the partition was by metes and bounds. In any case the partition has been effected after the tiller's day on 30-12-1957. His claim of being an exclusive owner of the suit land is based on the alleged partition effected on 30-12-1957. These facts are necessary to be high lighted as it is the case of the respondent that he was minor on the tiller's day and as such the petitioner could not have become deemed purchaser on account of his disability. For the present it is suffice to note that on 6-1-1961 the respondent made an application for certificate under section 88-C of the Act for exempting the suit land from the application of the relevant provisions of Act which would entitle the petitioner tenant to be declared as deemed purchaser. However, the said application was dismissed for default. Later on, the respondent appears to have applied for restoration of the said application for certificate under section 88-C of the Act, which request was granted and the application stood restored. However, the T.A.K., Indapur, after hearing the parties, by his order dated 28-6-1963 was pleased to reject the application for issuance of certificate under section 88-C of the Act. That in the meantime A.L.T. and Mamlatdar, initiated proceedings under section 32-G of the Act for fixing the purchase price of the suit land. The said authority by order dated 15-7-1963, after due enquiry and after notice to the respondent herein, fixed the purchase price in respect of the suit land at Rs. 3607/-. That the respondent did not challenge the said order passed in section 32-G proceedings as late as till May 1983, namely, after almost 20 years. Instead, the respondent preferred an appeal only against the decision of T.A.K., Indapur dated 28-6-1963 rejecting the application for issuance of certificate under section 88-C of the Act. The appellate authority was pleased to remand the said matter for further enquiry with regard to the prayer for certificate under section 88-C. That pending the aforesaid remand the revenue authorities acting on the order passed by the tenancy authority under section 32-G of the Act dated 15-7-1963 recorded mutation entry in 7 x 12 extract regarding the fixation of the purchase price in favour of the petitioner herein on 11-11-1966. That subsequent to the aforesaid steps taken by the authorities, the Tahasildar by order dated 27-2-1968 was pleased to grant certificate in favour of the respondent under section 88-C of the Act. Against the said order the petitioner preferred Tenancy Appeal No. 243 of 1968, which was allowed and the matter came to be remanded to the Tahasild

Click Here to Read the rest of this document