ORDER :- The short and interesting question that arises in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioners' contention that the respondents and their predecessor-in-title by name Ashru were the tenants is barred on account of the decision in another tenancy case which was given on the hypothesis that they were the tenants.

2. The controversy arises in the following manner: Survey No. 177, admeasuring 34.19 acres and situated at Anjani Bk. was originally owned by the petitioner No. 1 Krishnabai and her husband Raghunath. Raghunath is now dead and the petitioners Nos. 2 to 10 are his legal representatives. The respondents Nos. 1 to 11 are the heirs and legal representatives of a person by name Ashru. After the new Tenancy Act, Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 came into force, the name of Ashru was entered as a tenant of Survey No. 177. Such an entry was made as laid down in S. 8 of the Tenancy Act. It reads as follows:

" 3. (1) As soon as may be after this Act comes into force the Tahsildar shall cause a list of persons, other than occupancy tenants, and protected lessees, who are deemed to be tenants under sub-s. (1) of S. 6 to be prepared for ent

Click Here to Read the rest of this document