SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Bom) 1032

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Bobde S.A., J.
Vithal Malhar Kulkarni .... Petitioner.
Versus
Tarabai Anna Patil another.... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 422 of 1989, decided on 24-9-2002.
Advocates appeared :
G.R. Rege, for petitioner.
N.J. Patil, for respondent No. 1.

The former landlord had no standing to object to the grant of permission under section 43 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, after the statutory purchase of the land by the tenant.

Headnote:

Land Transfer - Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal - Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, Section 43

Fact of the Case:

The dispute involved the transfer of land under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, where the petitioner objected to the permission sought by the respondent to sell the property.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the former landlord had no standing to object to the grant of permission when sought by the statutory purchaser-tenant under section 43 of the Act.

Issues: The main issue was whether the former landlord had any subsisting interest in the land after its statutory purchase by the tenant, requiring the authority to issue a notice to him before granting permission to the tenant for transferring the land under the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the former landlord had no locus standi to object to the grant of permission under section 43 of the Act, as the matter was entirely between the respondent and the authority under the Act.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the former landlord had no standing to object to the grant of permission sought by the statutory purchaser-tenant under section 43 of the Act.

JUDGMENT - BOBDE S.A., J.:---This petition is directed against the order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dated 8th June, 1988 dismissing the petitioner's revision and holding that the petitioner is not entitled to object to the permission sought by the respondent to sell the property in question.

2. The dispute centers around the property admeasuring about 1.57 hectare from Gat No. 534 at Village Chinchawad, Taluka Karvir. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner, Vithal Malhar Kulkarni is the successor in title of Yamunabai who was the original land owner. The land in question was transferred under the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", in favour of the respondent Tarabai Anna Patil, who was the protected tenant. The certificate of purchase under the provisions of the Act was issued to the respondent and she became absolute owner of the lands in question.

3. The respondent Tarabai entered into an agreement to sale the land in question on 21st August, 1980 to Prakash Kolgonda Patil and Jambu Ramgonda Patil. As is required by section 43 of the Act, she applied for permission to sell the suit land. Section 43 of the Act reads as follows:---

"43. (1). No land purchased by a tenant under sections 32, 32-F, 32-I, 32-O, 33-C or 43-ID, or sold to any person under section 32-P or 64 shall be transferred by sale, gift, exchange, mortgage, lease or assignment * * * * without the previous sanction of the Collector, such sanction shall be given by the Collector in such circumstances, and subject to such conditions, as may be prescribed by the State Government.

Provided that, no such sanction shall be necessary where the land is to be mortgaged in favour of Government or a society registered or deemed to be registered under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 for raising a loan for effecting any improvement of such land.

(2) Any transfer * * * * of land in contravention of sub-section (1) shall be invalid."

The specific reason she gave for selling the land was that she is unable to cultivate the land and has decided to give up the profession of agriculture. The Collector, Kolhapur who considered the application granted sanction under section 43 on the ground stated by Tarabai. Admittedly, the Collector did not give any notice to the petitioner, the original owner of the suit land or to the other co-tenants.

4. Aggrieved by the permission, inter alia on the ground that the petitioner ought to have been given a notice, a revision was filed before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. That Tribunal by the impugned order has dismissed the revision on the ground that the petitioner has no locus standi to object to the grant of permission in view of the fact that the petitioner has lost all right, title and interest in the land in view of the compulsory transfer of the land.

5. Thus the only question before me is whether, after the lands are transferred by the landlord to a protected tenant under the provisions of the Act and the tenant has acquired land after payment of purchase price and a certificate to that effect has been issued to the tenant, the former landlord has any subsisting interest in the land such as to require the authority to issue a notice to him before granting permission to the tenant for transferring the land under the provisions of the Act. It is not necessary to go over the provisions in great detail. Suffice it to say that the relevant provisions which confer a right on tenant to purchase the land are contained in Chapter III sub-Chapter II which deals with purchase of land by tenant and regulate the said purchase. The right to purchase flows from section 32. The relevant extract of which reads as follows:---

"32(1) On the first day of April 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the tillers day") every tenant shall, subject to the other provisions of this section and the provisions of the next succeeding sections, be deemed to have purchase

















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top