The main legal point established in the judgment is the statutory ownership rights of tenants under Section 32 of the BTAL Act, which prevail over summary eviction applications under Section 84. The non est nature of the order under Section 32 G also influenced the court's decision.

1. The group of these three Writ Petitions can be decided by this common judgment, in view of the fact that these three Writ Petitions arise out of the judgment and order, passed by the learned Member, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad in Revision No. 122/B/2000/AN, dated 18.6.2001. The petitioners in all these three petitions are aggrieved by the said judgment and order, in view of the fact that the learned Member of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal allowed the Revision and thereby set aside the order, passed by the Assistant Collector, Rahuri, dated 16.4.1985 in Appeal No. 13 of 1983 and directed that the petitioners be evicted from the suit land and possession of the suit land be restored to the Revision Applicants.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. In all these three Writ Petitions, respondent nos. 1 and 2 are (1) Bburao Sakharam Adik and (2) Padmakar Sakharam Adik. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 filed the proceedings in the court of Sub-Divisional Officer, Rahuri, District Ahmednagar under Section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (herein after referred to as 'BTAL Act' for the sake of brevity)

Those proceedings under Section 84 of the BTAL Act were registered as Tenancy Case No. 13 of 1983.

The said proceedings were filed against following persons:

(1) Shri Malu Dhondiba Bule (2) Shri Shankar Bhaguji Doiphode (3) Shri Yadav Mhatarba Katore (4) Shri Karbhari Narayan Sonawane (5) Murlidhar Narayan Sonawane The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 3091 of 2001 are legal representatives of Malu Dhondiba Bule.

Shankar Bhaguji Doiphode the petitioner in Writ Petition no. 3093 of 2001 died on 19.10.2008. His Legal representatives, Gangubai, Eknath and Lahanu filed Civil Application No. 9028 of 2014 for substituting their names in his place. To the said application, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 Shri K.D. Bade Patil gave no objection and thus on 29.1.2015 the said application was allowed and legal representatives of Shankar Bhaguji Doiphode were substituted in place of the original petitioner.

Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 3094 of 2001 are legal representatives of Yadav Mhatarba Katore.

3. The application under Section 84 of the BTAL Act was in respect of certain lands, situated at Mauje Sonai, Taluka Newasa, District Ahmednagar.

The said application was pertaining to the following lands, situated at village Sonai.

The application under Section 84 proceeds that the aforesaid lands were originally owned by Shri Baburao Raghunath Darandale. He died on 20.5.1944. At the time of his death, he was not having wife, son and daughter, and therefore, the names of his two real sisters Asarabai Shahram Adik and Anjanabai through her legal representative Karbhari Narayan Sonawane were mutated vide Mutation Entry No. 7411.

It is further stated in the application that Asarabai Adik was residing at Mauje Khanapur, Taluka Shrirampur and Karbhari Sonawane was minor. Taking the disadvantage of this situation, the non-applicant nos. 1 to 3 in the application namely Malu Bule, Shankar Doiphode and Yadav Katore mutated their names as the tenants. It was further stated that all these lands were Patel Inam lands, and therefore, there is an entry in the 7/12 extract that “it is a new tenure land” and as such the provisions of BTAL Act were not applicable.

It has been further pointed out in the said application that on these grounds and since the afore said non-applicants were the tenants after 1957, the proceedings under Section 32 G of the BTAL Act were dropped by the Agricultural Lands Tribunal in proceeding No. 241 of 1961. It is further averred in the application that in spite of the order in proceeding no. 241 of 1961 by the Agricultural Lands Tribunal, the afore sa