( 1 ) THESE three petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution are filed by the landlady who was the widow of one Patel Baldevdas Hathibhai in respect of three S. Nos. 48/1 48 and 50 of Radhavanj village in Taluka Matar District Kaira in the possession of different tenants who were held to be deemed purchasers on 1-4-57 and in whose cases the purchase has been determined in proceedings under sec. 32g of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 hereinafter referred to as the Act. The revenue authorities as well as the Revenue Tribunal held that the respondents-tenants had become deemed purchasers and on that footing purchase price has been determined. It is this finding which is challanged in these petitions. All these three petitions raise common questions of law and facts and they are disposed of by this common order

( 2 ) MR Patel raised three grounds: (1) That the landlady being under a disability there was a postponed date her tenants could not become deemed purchasers ors 1-4-57 ? (2) That the finding of the Revenue Tribunal was perverse in all these three cases that the concerned tenants did not hold land in excess of the ceiling limit and they beco