Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
P.P. Bhatt, J.
Ramanbhai Bhagubhai - Thro Poanitinbhai Mangubhai Patel – Appellant
Vs.
Heirs of Late Bhikhabhai Khushalbhai Shantaben – Respondent
Special Civil Application No. 1837 of 2012
Decided On : 05-09-2018
Tenancy Act - 1976 - Section 32M - Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Section 32G - Land Case - Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are the tenants of the suit land bearing Survey - Suit land belonged to deceased - Petitioners are cultivating the suit land as tenants - Held, In the present case, when the Tribunal has dismissed the Revision Application at preliminary stage, it was the duty of the Tribunal to call for the records and proceedings from the Court below so that it can ascertain the case, as the Tribunal was finally deciding the rights of the parties - In the present case, even though it was an obligatory duty on the part of the Tribunal to call for the records and proceedings from the authority below if the Tribunal wanted to decide the Revision Application at preliminary stage, the petitioners made an application before the Tribunal requesting the Tribunal to call for the records and proceedings of Tenancy Appeal in spite of that, the Tribunal has not called for the records and proceedings from the authority below and simply dismissed the Revision Application at the preliminary stage without calling and examining the records and proceedings and also without referring the documents produced by the petitioners along with the Revision Application - Petition allowed. (Para 9)
P.P. Bhatt, J.
By way of present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 09.01.2012 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No.TEN.BS.95 of 2011 at Annexure-C and the order of the Deputy Collector dated 02.11.2011 passed in Tenancy Appeal No.1 of 2011 at Annexure-B and consequently by confirming the order passed by the Mamlatdar and ALT dated 14.04.1976 passed under Section 32G of the Tenancy Act at Annexure-A and also the certificate issued by the Mamlatdar and ALT under Section 32M of the Tenancy Act dated 14.06.1976 at Annexure-A.
2. Brief facts of the present petition are as under:
2.1 The petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are the tenants of the suit land bearing Survey No.342, Block No.383 admeasuring 0 Hector 82 Aare and 96 sq. mtrs. situated in the sim of village Puna, Taluka Surat City, District Surat. The suit land belonged to deceased Bhikhabhai Khushalbhai. The petitioners are cultivating the suit land as tenants.
2.2 The petitioners have been declared as tenants by order dated 14.04.1976, passed by the Mamlatdar and ALT and purchase price was fixed as per Section 32G of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act,1948 ('the Tenancy Act' for short). The petitioners-tenants fully paid the purchase price as fixed by the Mamlatdar and ALT and therefore, the Certificate under Section 32M of the Tenancy Act was issued by the Mamlatdar and ALT on 14.06.1976, which was registered with the Office of Sub-Registrar at Surat vide Serial No.3224 dated 10.08.1976.
Subsequently, the order passed under Section 32G came to be mutated in revenue record by entry No.3323 and the order passed under Section 32M came to be mutated by entry No.3324 on 12.05.2000 respectively.
2.3 The heirs of the original owner deceased Bhikhabhai Khushalbhai of the land in question by filing Tenancy Appeal No. 1 of 2011 before the Deputy Collector challenged the said order dated 14.04.1976 and the Certificate dated 14.04.1976 issued to the petitioners, after more than 34 years, without filing an application for condonation of delay. Even the original owner of the land in question deceased Bhikhabhai Khushalbhai has not challenged the said order dated 14.04.1976 in his life time for about 8 years. The Deputy Collector after hearing both the parties, in his order dated 02.11.2011, has enumerated seven points culled out regarding the merits of the case, and on the basis of the same, the Deputy Collector has allowed the application for condonation of delay which was never filed by respondents Nos.1 and 2 (heirs of the original owner of the land).
2.4 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order said order dated 02.11.2011, passed by the Deputy Collector, the petitioners preferred the Revision Application No.TEN.BS.95 of 2011 before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties by order its dated 09.01.2012 dismissed the Revision Application at preliminary stage and confirmed order dated 02.11.2011, on the premise that after allowing the application for condonation of delay, the petitioners would be granted an opportunity for hearing on merits, therefore, they would not be prejudiced, and nor would there be a violation of the principles of natural justice.
2.5 Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order dated 09.01.2012 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No.TEN.BS.95 of 2011 and the order of the Deputy Collector dated 02.11.2011 passed in Tenancy Appeal No.1 of 2011, the petitioners have filed the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
3. Heard learned senior advocate Mr.Shalin Mehta appearing for learned advocate Mr.J.M. Patel for the petitioners, learned senior advocate Mr.S.N. Shelat appearing for learned advocate Mr.N.M. Kapadia for the private r
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
