The main legal point established in the judgment is that the successors of the original tenant could not claim tenancy rights as the original tenant was dispossessed before the tiller's day and the subsequent restoration order was rejected and attained finality. The court also emphasized the importance of the statutory period for intimation of purchase and the ineffectiveness of possession obtained through a compromised restoration order.

JUDGMENT - KHANWILKAR A.M., J.:---This writ petition takes exception to the order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune dated June 30, 1986 in Revision No. M.R.T. S.H. II. 1/86 (T.E.N. 8 36/85) Pune.

2. Briefly stated, the land bearing Gat Nos. 830, 824 and 807 situated at village Kini, Taluka Akkalkot, District Solapur was owned by Sangabassappa Manikshetty. Some time in the year 1941, the said Sanmgabassappa Manikshetty by his Will created a public trust in respect of the subject property and also provided maintenance to her widow Nillawabai from the income of the said land of the trust. The said Sangabassappa Manikshetty however, leased out the suit land to one Shivlingappa viz. father of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and husband of respondent No. 3 herein in the year 1950-51. It has come on record that in the village record mutation entry has been made on 15-2-1954 to indicate that the subject property is a trust property. The said Sangabassappa Manikshetty however, expired on 3-11-1955, leaving behind widow Nillawabai. Under the Will executed by him, Nillawabai was to get maintenance. The parties, however, have proceeded on the premise that Nillawabai became the landlady after the demise of her husband Sangabassappa Manikshetty. The matter has been examined in that perspective. Be that as it may, it is respondents' case that the said Nillawabai disposed Shivlingappa, their predecessor in title from the suit lands in the year 1956 which is before the tiller's day i.e. 1-4-1957. In the circumstances, Shivalingappa had filed application under section 29(1) for restoration of possession of the suit land in which an ex parte order was passed in favour of said Shivlingappa directing handing over possession of the suit lands to him. Against the said decision Nillawabai had filed an appeal in which both Nillawabai and Shivlingappa entered into compromise whereunder it was agreed between the parties that Nillawabai would retain possession of the suit land. This compromise has been recorded on 29-6-1959. However, soon thereafter Nillawabai expired on 15-7-1967. The said Shivlingappa predecessor of the respondents filed tenancy case under section 32(1-B) of the Act before the Tahsildar for restoration of possession. This application is undoubtedly filed against the predecessor of the trustees which was created by deceased Sangabassappa Manikshetti in respect of the suit land. The Tahsildar after adjudication of the matter by order dated 31-10-1973, allowed the application filed by the said Shivlingappa and ordered restoration of possession of the suit lands. Pursuant to this order, the said Shivlingappa is stated to have been put in possession of the suit lands, as is seen from the mutation entry. However, being dissatisfied by the above said order, the trustees preferred an appeal before the S.D.O. Solapur, which appeals was however dismissed on 5-6-1974. Consequently the trustees took up the matter in revision before the M.R.T., Pune bearing No. 290/1974. The revisional authority allowed the said revision preferred by the trustees and was pleased to quash the proceedings initiated by Shivlingappa under section 32(1-B) of the Act. It is not in dispute that this order passed by the Tribunal, negating the claim of restoration of possession set up by Shivlingappa, has attained finality, as the same has gone unchallenged. The predecessor of the respondent in that sense suffered the said order during his life time. The said Shivlingappa died on 12-9-1975. The record indicates that Tahsildar fixed rent in respect of the suit land some time on 19-12-1975. Taking clue from this development, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed Tenancy Case No. 6 of 1980 under section 70(b) of the Act in the year 1980 before the Additional Tahsildar, Akkalkot asserting that they are tenants. The application does not specifically set out as to whether the tenancy is claimed prior to the tiller's day or on the basis of possession obtained by Shivlingappa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document