( 1 ) THE question of jurisdiction which I am required to decide in this revision application is: Whether the Mamlatdar has jurisdiction to decide the question of past tenancy after Gujarat Amendment Act 5 of 1973 came into force on March 8 1973 particularly when before coming into operation of the said Act the High Court had directed the Civil Court to decide the question of past tenancy following the judgment of the Supreme Court in Musamia Imam v. Rabari Govindbhai A. I. R. 1969 Supreme Court 439

( 2 ) A few relevant facts giving rise to the present revision application may be stated in brief.

( 3 ) THE applicant had filed a suit being Special Civil Suit No. 12 of 1955 for recovering possession of agricultural properties houses and building sites from original defendant No. 1 on the ground that the applicant and opponent No. 2 being the full sisters were the owners and became entitled to the possession of the said properties on the remarriage of opponent No. 3 on June 19 1954 who was originally the widow of their deceased brother Bhagwanbhai Ranchhodbhai who died intestate on May 22 1946 leaving behind him the suit properties in the hands of his heir defendant No. 3 who inherited the same as widows estate. On her remarriage she lost all her rights to the properties and the applicant and opponent No. 2 became fully entitled to possession of the same as reversionary heirs of the deceased Bhagwanbhai Ranchhodbhai. It was the case of the applicant that the original deceased defendant No. 1 Paragbhai Shankerbhai in collusion with defendant No. 3 dealt with the suit properties adversely to the interests of the applicant and defendant No. 2 and got in wrongful possession of the same. In substance the said suit for possession was therefore directed against original defendant No. 1 as a trespasser.

( 4 ) THE original deceased defendant No. 1 resisted the suit on various grounds one of the grounds being that he claimed the possession of the suit property as a tenant thereof. The learned trial Judge raised the various issues and the relevant issues in regard to the tenancy rights are Issues Nos. 11 and 12 and he answered them against original defendant No. 1.

( 5 ) THE trial Court ultimately disposed of the suit by its judgment and decree dated July 7 1968 declaring the applicants half share in the suit properties and gave a decree of partition of the said half share with original defendant No. 1.

( 6 ) BOTH the contesting patties were aggrieved by the judgment and decree given by the trial Court and two different appeals being First Appeal No. 551 of 1958 and 597 of 1958 were filed in the High Court of Bombay at Bombay. The said appeals were ultimately transferred to this Court on bifurcation of the State and they came up for hearing and disposal before V. B. Raju J. who by his judgment and decree dated 28th November 1962 held that the lower Court was in error in considering the issue regarding the tenancy and therefore reversed the judgment and decree of the trial Court and directed the trial Court to follow the procedure under sec. 85a of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 On remand the trial Court as per the judgment of this Court made the reference to the Mamlatdar Wagra district Broach on the following issue :whether the defendant No. 1 proves that on the date of the filing of the suit that is on 18th October 1955 he was a tenant of the suit lands as mentioned in paragraph 20 of the written statement Ex. 18 ?

( 7 ) THE Mamlatdar Wagra the District Deputy Collector Broach and the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal consistently held that the original defendant No. 1 was not a tenant in Tenancy Case No. 39 of 1964 Tenancy Appeal No. 11 of 1965 and TEN. A. 904 of 1967.

( 8 ) THE heirs of original defendant No. 1 (i. e. opponents Nos. 1/1 to 1/5) filed an application being Special Civil Application No. 954 of 1968 as they were aggrieved by the orders passed by the revenue forums as stated above. On the strength of