Case Note & Summary
The dispute pertains to agricultural lands leased by the landlord to the tenant in 1943. The landlord filed Tenancy Case No. 08 of 1973 seeking possession on grounds of arrears of rent for three years, but the Tahsildar dismissed it. After remand by MRT, the landlord filed a fresh application in 1984 on grounds of arrears for more than three years, subletting, and bonafide personal cultivation. The Tahsildar allowed the application in 1985, finding the tenant in arrears for 15 years and the landlord's need bonafide, but dismissed the subletting ground. The SDO confirmed these findings. However, the MRT in revision set aside the concurrent findings and remanded the case for deposit of arrears under Section 25(1) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The tenant failed to deposit arrears as directed, leading to the landlord filing Tenancy Case No. 15 of 1988, which was allowed by the Tahsildar in 1988. The tenant's appeal was partly allowed by the SDO in 1999, but the MRT in 1991 restored the Tahsildar's order for possession. The landlord filed WP No. 4492 of 1988 challenging the MRT's 1988 order, and the tenant filed WP No. 2523 of 1991 challenging the same order and WP No. 2520 of 1991 challenging the MRT's 1991 order. The High Court held that the MRT exceeded its revisional jurisdiction by re-appreciating evidence without any jurisdictional error, and that the tenant's failure to deposit arrears justified eviction. The court dismissed the tenant's petitions and allowed the landlord's petition, restoring the concurrent findings of the Tahsildar and SDO.
Headnote
A) Tenancy Law - Arrears of Rent - Section 25(2) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Landlord sought possession on grounds of arrears for more than three years, subletting, and bonafide personal cultivation - Tahsildar and SDO found tenant in arrears for 15 years and landlord's need bonafide - MRT set aside concurrent findings and remanded for deposit of arrears - Held that MRT exceeded its revisional jurisdiction by re-appreciating evidence without jurisdictional error (Paras 6-10).
B) Tenancy Law - Bonafide Personal Cultivation - Section 25(2) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Landlord's requirement for personal cultivation was upheld by lower authorities - MRT did not disturb this finding - Held that bonafide need was established (Paras 6-10).
C) Tenancy Law - Subletting and Sub-division - Section 25(2) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Landlord's ground of subletting was dismissed by Tahsildar and not challenged - Held that this ground was not in issue (Para 6).
D) Tenancy Law - Failure to Deposit Arrears - Section 25(1) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Tenant failed to deposit arrears within three months as directed by MRT - Tahsildar ordered possession to landlord - SDO remanded, but MRT restored Tahsildar's order - Held that tenant's non-compliance justified eviction (Paras 6, 10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the MRT was justified in setting aside concurrent findings of the Tahsildar and SDO and remanding the case for deposit of arrears; and whether the tenant's failure to deposit arrears as directed entitles the landlord to possession.
Final Decision
Writ Petition No.4492 of 1988 filed by the landlord is allowed. The order dated 27.01.1988 passed by the MRT in Revision Case No.328 of 1985 is quashed and set aside. The concurrent findings of the Tahsildar and SDO are restored. Writ Petition No.2523 of 1991 and Writ Petition No.2520 of 1991 filed by the tenant are dismissed. The tenant is directed to hand over possession of the suit lands to the landlord within three months.
Law Points
- Section 25(2) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act
- 1948
- arrears of rent
- bonafide personal cultivation
- subletting
- sub-division
- concurrent findings
- re-appreciation of evidence by MRT
- remand
- deposit of arrears
- possession
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (5) 50
Writ Petition No. 4492 of 1988 with Interim Application No. 106 of 2020, Interim Application No. 103 of 2020, Interim Application No. 107 of 2020, Interim Application No. 102 of 2020; Writ Petition No. 2523 of 1991 with Civil Application No. 323 of 2018; Writ Petition No. 2520 of 1991
Mr. Anil Anturkar, Senior Advocate i/by Ms. Vrishali L. Maindad, Advocate for Petitioners in WP No.4492 of 1988 and Respondents in WP No.2523 of 1991 and WP No.2520 of 1991; Mr. Dilip Bodake, Advocate for Petitioner in WP No.2523 of 1991 and WP No.2520 of 1991 and Respondent in WP No.4492 of 1988
Shankar Shripad Latkar (since deceased) through his LRs. 1A. Shripad Shankar Latkar & Ors.
Dattatraya Haribhau Borawake (since deceased) through his LRs. 1a. Mrs. Lata V. Harekal & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petitions challenging orders of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in tenancy matters concerning eviction of tenant for arrears of rent and bonafide personal cultivation.
Remedy Sought
Landlord sought quashing of MRT order and restoration of concurrent findings of Tahsildar and SDO; tenant sought setting aside of MRT orders and lower authorities' findings.
Filing Reason
Landlord filed WP No.4492 of 1988 challenging MRT order dated 27.01.1988 that set aside concurrent findings and remanded for deposit of arrears; tenant filed WP No.2523 of 1991 challenging same order and WP No.2520 of 1991 challenging MRT order dated 18.04.1991 directing possession to landlord.
Previous Decisions
Tahsildar allowed landlord's application on 04.03.1985; SDO confirmed on 30.09.1985; MRT allowed tenant's revision on 27.01.1988 setting aside concurrent findings and remanding; Tahsildar allowed landlord's application for possession on 30.09.1988; SDO partly allowed tenant's appeal on 25.01.1999 remanding; MRT allowed landlord's revision on 18.04.1991 directing possession.
Issues
Whether the MRT exceeded its revisional jurisdiction by re-appreciating evidence and setting aside concurrent findings of the Tahsildar and SDO?
Whether the tenant's failure to deposit arrears of rent as directed by the MRT entitles the landlord to possession under Section 25(2) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948?
Submissions/Arguments
Landlord argued that MRT erred in re-appreciating evidence without any jurisdictional error and that concurrent findings should not have been disturbed.
Tenant argued that the MRT correctly found that landlord failed to prove arrears and that the tenant was entitled to deposit arrears under Section 25(1).
Ratio Decidendi
The MRT, in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, cannot re-appreciate evidence and set aside concurrent findings of fact unless there is a jurisdictional error or perversity. The tenant's failure to deposit arrears as directed under Section 25(1) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, justifies eviction under Section 25(2).
Judgment Excerpts
MRT held that landlord had failed to prove his case under Section 25(2) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 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 together with costs of proceedings, the Tahsildar shall give the tenant time of three months to deposit the arrears and on such compliance pass a suitable order under the provisions of Section 25(1) of the said Act.
The above three Writ Petitions having common facts are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.
Procedural History
On 05.05.1943, suit land leased to tenant. On 20.05.1964, rent fixed. On 19.03.1973, landlord filed Tenancy Case No.08 of 1973 for possession on arrears, dismissed on 05.03.1975. Appeal dismissed on 31.01.1976. MRT allowed revision on 31.12.1976 and remanded. On 03.06.1984, landlord filed fresh application. Tahsildar allowed on 04.03.1985. SDO confirmed on 30.09.1985. MRT allowed tenant's revision on 27.01.1988 setting aside concurrent findings and remanding. Landlord filed WP No.4492 of 1988 on 29.04.1988. Tenant failed to deposit arrears; landlord filed Tenancy Case No.15 of 1988; Tahsildar allowed on 30.09.1988. SDO partly allowed tenant's appeal on 25.01.1999 remanding. MRT allowed landlord's revision on 18.04.1991 directing possession. Tenant filed WP No.2523 of 1991 on 10.06.1991 and WP No.2520 of 1991 in June 1991.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948: 25(1), 25(2)
- Constitution of India: Article 227
