The main legal point established in the judgment is that under the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, the tenant must prove continuous payment of rent for three years to avoid eviction, and the landlord's statutory notice for termination of tenancy must be valid.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Anil Anturkar, learned Senior Advocate for Petitioners in WP No.4492 of 1988 and Respondents in WP No.2523 of 1991 and WP No.2520 of 1991 and Mr. Dilip Bodake, learned Advocate for Petitioner in WP No.2523 of 1991 and WP No.2520 of 1991 and Respondent in WP No.4492 of 1988.

2. Writ Petition No.4492 of 1988 has been filed by Shankar Shripad Latkar and others (for short “landlord”) against the judgment and order dated 21.01.1988 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune (for short “MRT”) in MRT Revision Case No.328 of 1985.

3. Writ Petition No.2523 of 1991 has been filed by Dattatraya Haribhau Borawake Ors. (for short “tenant”) against the same judgment.

4. Writ Petition No.2520 of 1991 has been filed by the tenant against the judgment and order dated 14.04.1991 passed by the MRT, Pune in MRT Case No.64 of 1990.

6. Parties shall be referred to as landlord and tenant for convenience. Needless to state that the parties to the present Petitioners are all successors-in-title of the landlord and tenant and shall be bound by the outcome of the present Writ Petitions. Such of the relevant facts which are necessary for determination of the present dispute are stated herein under:-

(i) On 05.05.1943, the suit land was leased to the tenant for harvesting sugarcane by a registered lease deed.

(ii) On 20.05.1964, rent of the suit lands was fixed at Rs.950/- per year in Case No.74 of 1964 filed by the landlord.

(iii) On 19.03.1973, landlord filed Tenancy Case No.08 of 1973 in the Court of the Tahsildar, Phaltan seeking possession of the suit land on the ground of the tenant being in arrears of rent for three years prior thereto for the years 1969 -1970, 1970 -1971 and 1971 – 1972 and also in view of sub-division of the suit land.

(iv) On 05.03.1975, Tahsildar, Phaltan dismissed the said case.

(v) On 31.01.1976, landlord’s Appeal No.18 of 1975 against the aforesaid judgment and order of Tahsildar was dismissed by the Sub-Division Officer (for short “SDO”), Phaltan.

(vi) On 31.12.1976, MRT allowed the landlord’s Revision Application and set aside both the aforesaid judgments passed by the Tahsildar and SDO and remanded the case to the Tahsildar for fresh consideration and disposal.

(vii) On 03.06.1984, landlord filed an Application before the Tahsildar, Phaltan seeking possession of the suit land from the tenant on the following grounds:-

(a) that the tenant committed defaults in payment of rent for more than three years;

(b) that the tenant sublet and sub-divided the suit lands without landlord's permission; and

(c) that the landlord required the suit lands for his bonafide personal cultivation.

(viii) On 04.03.1985, the Tenancy Court allowed the landlord’s Application by returning a finding that the tenant committed default for more than three years beginning from 1967 - 1968 onwards up to 1982 – 1983 that is for 15 years and the landlord required the suit lands for his bonafinde cultivation. In so far as the ground of subleting and sub-division was concerned, landlord’s Application on that ground was dismissed.

(ix) On 30.09.1985, the SDO confirmed the aforementioned findings and dismissed the tenant’s Appeal No.17 of 1985.

(x) On 27.01.1988, the tenant’s Revision Application No.328 of 1985 was allowed by the MRT by reappreciating and reassessing the entire evidence and resultantly concurrent findings given by the Tahsildar and the SDO were set aside. MRT held that landlord had failed to prove his case under Section 25(2) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short “the said Act”) and remanded the case back to the Tahsildar with a direction that on the Application of the tenant for making payment of arrears of rent to