S. B. DESHMUKH, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Shri Patni, Adv. for petitioners and shri A. A. Joshi, Adv. for respondent no. 1.

( 2 ) THIS petition takes on exception to the judgment and order passed by the learned Member, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in appeal No. 89/a/86/a dated 27th February, 1989, confirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, in file no. 81/lr/tnc/a/62 dated, 10th May, 1985.

( 3 ) FEW facts necessary to understand the controversy between the parties, may be summarised as below :- the agricultural landed property having survey No. 21/2, converted to Gat No. 8 admeasuring 25 acres 17 gunthas is situated at village Khardi, tq. Khultabad, District Aurangabad. After declaration as an occupant regarding the said land under Section 6 of the Hydrabad Abolition of inam and Cash Grants Act, 1954, the said land came to be granted in favour of Respondent No. l on l. 7. 1960. The respondente No. 1 claimed to be a tenant and, therefore, the Occupancy Certificate under the provisions of the Hyderabad Abolition of Inam and Cash Grants Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act of 1954", for short) came to be granted in, favour of respondent No. l. It is alleged by the respondent no. l, who was applicant before the learned Deputy Collector, that he has been forcibly dispossessed by the present petitioner and Respondent no. 2 somewhere in the, year 1980-81. The Respondent No. l, i. e, Maroti s/o Trimbak Gayke, filed an application under Section 98 of the hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (hereafter referred to as the said Act of 1950, for short), before the Deputy Collector, Land reforms, Aurangabad. In the said application, it is contended by the respondent No. l. . . . . Maroti that he has deposited the occupancy price of the land in question to the tune of Rs. 462. 48 ps. on 15th September, 1965. According to his contention, a Certificate has been issued by the nayab Tahsildar, Land Reforms, accordingly. The respondent No. 1 has also contended in the application that the name of the father was wrongly written first and then, the name of the respondent No. 1 was written. The correction has been carried out, as per the orders passed by the Tahsildar. Ultimately, it is alleged in the application that the original petitioner i. e. the Original Applicant Maroti S/o. Trimbak Gayke, is dispossessed illegally somewhere in the year 1980, by the present petitioners and respondent No. 2. He, therefore, claimed eviction of the petitioners under Section 98 of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural lands Act. The learned Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, after hearing the parties, passed an order on 10th May, 1985, in file No. 81 / lr/tnc/a/62 No. 153/85 and allowed the said application filed by the respondent No. 1 Maroti. The possession of the land in dispute Gat No. 21/2 of village Khirdi, Tal. Khultabad, to the extent of 25 Acres and 17 gunthas were directed to be handed over to the respondent No. 1, by dispossessing the petitioners and the respondent No. 2 in this petition.

( 4 ) THE order passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, aurangabad dated 10th May, 1985 has been challenged by the present petitioners by filing an Appeal before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (mrt for short ). The MRT, as stated above, dismissed the said appeal no. 89/a/86/a by the judgment and order dated 27th February, 1989. ( 5 ) THE learned Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Aurangabad as well as the MRT , Aurangabad, referred to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court under the provisions of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural lands Act, 1948 and more specifically under Section 84 (c) of the said Act, the learned counsel Mr. Patni, has placed on record a copy of the said judgment, which is reported in 1969 T. L. R. Page 252. To appreciate the contentions and submissions raised by both the learned counsel regarding this judgment of the Division Bench, the provision laid down under Sectio