IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1337 OF 1998 Shri. Sagaru Laxman Shinde since deceased by his legal heirs and representatives i. Balkrishna alias Dhondiram Sagaru Shinde (Koli)

ii. Bhagubai Ananda Mahind iii. Suman Bhanudas Dhokale iv. Pandurang Anan Mahind v. Santosh Bhanudas Dhokale …. Petitioners (Org. Applicants Tenants)

-Versus-

1. Shri Mukund Shankar Kurlekar since deceased through L.R.s

1A. Mr. Annat Shankar Kurlekar

1B. Mr. Surendra Haribhau Londhe

1C. Smt. Varsha Vibhakar Phatak 1D. Smt. Unnati Ramdas Kurlekar

1E. Smt. Sunita Prafulla Deshpande

1F. Smr. Sujata Sudhakar Deshpande

1G. Smt. Sarvari Jayanti Kale

2. Shri Raosaheb alias Rajabhau Shankar Krurlekar since deceased through L.R.s

2A. Smt. Uttara Shankar Kurlekar …. Respondents (Org. Opponents)

_______________________________________________________________

Mr. Rupesh K. Bobade with Ms. Shraddha K. Nakadi, for the Petitioner.

Mr. Sushant Prabhune, for the Respondent.

_______________________________________________________________

CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

Reserved On : 7 February 2025.

JUDGMENT :

A. THE CHALLENGE

1) By this petition, Petitioners have challenged the order dated 19 November 1997 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune allowing Revision Application No. MRT.SS.101/1991 filed by the Respondents and setting aside the judgment and order dated 28 February 1991 passed by the Assistant Collector, Walwa, District- Sangli. The Assistant Collector in turn had allowed the Appeal preferred by the Petitioners and while setting aside the order dated 13 May 1988 passed by the Tehsildar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal, Khanapur, had directed fixation of purchase price of the land by recognizing the right of the Petitioners to purchase the same. Petitioners are thus aggrieved by the decision of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in not recognizing their right to purchase the tenanted land under the provisions of Section 32G read with Section 32F of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (the Act).

B. FACTS

2) Land bearing Survey No. 285/1 admeasuring 4 Hectares 35 Ares plus 3 Ares pot-kharaba situated at Village-Devarashtra, Taluka- Khanapur, District-Sangli is the subject matter of controversy in the present petition, which is hereinafter referred to as ‘the tenanted land’. One Shankar Govind Kurlekar was the owner of the tenanted land. It appears that a registered Partition Deed was executed on 4 August 1956, under which the tenanted land came to the share of Shankar’s sons, Mukund Shankar Kurlekar (Mukund) and Raosaheb alias Rajabhau Shankar Kurlekar (Raosaseb). Thus, on the Tiller’s Day of 1 April 1957, Mukund and Raosaheb had become owners of the tenanted land. The names of Mukund and Raosaheb were mutated to the revenue records in respect of the tenanted land vide Mutation Entry No. 2899 certified on 8 April 1957. Shankar apparently passed away in the year 1960. Petitioners’ predecessor filed proceedings under the provisions of Section 32G of the Act in the year 1963. In those proceedings, statements of the tenant were recorded on 8 February 1963 and 23 February 1963 in which he stated that Mukund and Raosaheb were minors and therefore fresh proceedings would be initiated by issuing notice to them after attaining the age of majority. On account of this statement being made by the tenant, the ALT dropped proceedings initiated in the year 1963 observing that right of the tenant to purchase the tenanted land was postponed till expiry of the period mentioned in Section 32F(1) of the Act. As a matter of fact, Mukund had already attained majority on 8 February 1960, his date of birth being 8 February 1942. Raosaheb attained majority on 18 February 1964, his date of birth being 18 July 1946.

3) It appears that after attaining the age of majority by Raosaheb on 18 February 1964, neither any notice was issued by the tenant nor proceedings were initiated expressing intention to purchase the tenanted land for