Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

Bombay High Court Hears Writ Petition Against Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal Order Declaring Kishanrao Kadam as Tenant; Landlord Relies on Earlier Civil Decree and Findings of Tenancy Authorities

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD
Admin
2026-08-10 03:42:43
  • 9
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

WRIT PETITION NO. 2345 OF 1992

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2012 LawText (BOM) (07) 40

Writ Petition No. 2345 of 1992 along with W.P. Nos. 1035 of 1992 and 1822 of 1992

2012-07-04

S.S. Shinde

Mr. C.R. Deshpande, Mr. S.K. Shelke, Mr. R.K. Ashtekar

Gangubai W/o Bhagwanrao Pawatekar (Deceased, represented by Legal Heir Ambubai alias Shubhangi Sureshrao Pawatekar)

Kishanrao s/o Limbajirao Kadam (Deceased) through Legal Representatives and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India challenging the order of Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal declaring the first respondent as tenant under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner (land owner) sought to quash the Tribunal's order and restore the civil court decree for possession.

Filing Reason

The MRT allowed revision and declared Kishanrao as tenant, ignoring earlier findings by tenancy authorities and civil court.

Previous Decisions

Tahsildar, Beed allowed resumption of land in favour of Gangubai on 7-1-1961; Naib Tahsildar (Land Reforms) on 14-11-1964 held Kishanrao not a tenant but trespasser, no jurisdiction; Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) on 6-8-1965 affirmed Kishanrao not a tenant; Special Civil Suit No. 4/1974 decreed on 22-4-1977 in favour of Gangubai for possession and mesne profits; Kishanrao's application for framing tenancy issue rejected, civil revision and first appeal dismissed, SLP (Civil) No. 3449/1977 dismissed on 16-11-1977; Thereafter, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Revision No. 101/B/90/Beed on 24-10-1991 allowed revision and declared Kishanrao as tenant.

Judgment Excerpts

the Tenancy Court has already decided the issue by holding as Kishanrao is a trespasser the Special Leave petition (Civil) was dismissed on 16th November, 1977

Procedural History

In 1961, Gangubai filed application under Section 44 for resumption; Tahsildar ordered resumption. In 1964, possession could not be delivered due to Kishanrao's obstruction; Naib Tahsildar held Kishanrao not a tenant but no jurisdiction to evict. Appeal to Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) in 1965 found Kishanrao a trespasser. Gangubai filed Special Civil Suit No. 4/1974; decreed on 22-4-1977. Kishanrao's attempts to get tenancy issue referred were rejected by civil court, High Court and Supreme Court (SLP dismissed 16-11-1977). Kishanrao later initiated proceedings under Section 8 and other sections; ultimately Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Revision No. 101/B/90/Beed declared him tenant on 24-10-1991. Writ petitions filed in 1992 challenging said order.

Acts & Sections

  • Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950: Section 44, Section 32(2), Section 8, Section 32(1)
  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order XX Rule 12(c)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
tenancy rights resumption of land personal cultivation trespasser civil decree res judicata writ jurisdiction Hyderabad Tenancy Act Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal jurisdiction mesne profit

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Hears Writ Petition Against Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal Order Declaring Kishanrao Kadam as Tenant; Landlord Relies on Earlier Civil Decree and Findings of Tenancy Authorities 2026-08-10 03:42:43
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Sections 23(5) of Income Tax Act, 1922 and 297(2)(g) and 271(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961 Against Double Taxation and Article 14 Challenges. Registered Firm’s Appeal Dismissed; Provisions on Double Taxation ... 2026-08-10 03:42:43
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition acquittal natural justice murder compensation burden of proof Limitation benefit of doubt Article 226 circumstantial evidence
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Against School Tribunal's Denial of Reinstatement t...

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the eviction order passed unde...

Supreme Court Upholds Refusal to Eschew Proof Affidavit in Probate Proceedings. Objections...

Supreme Court Allows Agriculturists' Appeal for Enhanced Compensation; Condones Delay Usin...

Supreme Court Upholds Defendant in Property Sale Deed Dispute; Non-Payment of Balance Cons...

Supreme Court Directs Deeper SIT Probe and Enforces State Compliance in Jojari River Conta...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Compulsory Retirement Case Based on Declining Performanc...

Lost Your Password?