Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Veekaylal Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in the Bombay High Court, challenging the order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dated 28 April 2017, which had dismissed its revision application under Section 76 of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The dispute concerned land bearing Survey No.318, Hissa No.7A, admeasuring 1 Acre 12 Gunthas at Village Dahisar, Taluka Borivali. The petitioner claimed that the land originally belonged to one Haji Ali Mohammed Haji Cassum, who died in 1946. His heirs filed an administrative suit in the Bombay High Court, and a Court Receiver was appointed. In 1962, the Court Receiver auctioned about 644 acres of land, including the suit property, and accepted the highest bid of Rs.13,50,000 from one K. Lalchand, acting on behalf of the petitioner. After K. Lalchand’s death, the Court was authorized to execute conveyances in favour of his nominees and legal heirs. Meanwhile, respondent nos. 1 to 6, claiming to be tenants, filed an application under Section 32G of the Act before the Tahsildar for declaration of tenancy and fixation of purchase price. Earlier, in 1970, they had obtained a 32M certificate in respect of adjacent land. In 2013, they filed a fresh application under Section 32G for the suit property, relying on mutation entries and khand receipts. The Tahsildar recorded statements, obtained a Panchanama, and after hearing both sides, allowed the application on 2 December 2013, fixing the purchase price. The petitioner’s appeal under Section 74 was dismissed by the Collector on 5 February 2015, and its revision under Section 76 was dismissed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on 28 April 2017. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition, alleging that the orders suffered from jurisdictional errors and perversity. The judgment text provided does not include the parties' detailed arguments, the Court's analysis, or the final decision.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against the concurrent findings of the tenancy authorities under the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948?
Law Points
- Article 227 of the Constitution of India
- Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act
- 1948
- Section 32G
- Section 74
- Section 76
- Tenancy rights
- Fixation of purchase price
- Court auction sale
- Concurrent findings
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (02) 22
WRIT PETITION NO. 5539 OF 2017
Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar, Mr.Prasad S.Dani, Mr.J.G.Reddy, Mr.Rajeev R.Sharma, Mr.R.P.Kadam, Mr.V.A.Thorat, Mr.Vishwanath Patil, Mr.Vinduprakash Pandey, Mr.Pramodkumar Pandya, Mr.A.Y.Sakhare, Mr.Siddharth Karpe, Mr.Vivek Tripathi, Mr.Pushparaj Singh
M/s.Veekaylal Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Shri Bhalchandra D. Patil, Smt. Anandibai Anant Patil, Shri Narendra Anant Patil, Shri Prafull Anant Patil, Shri Vikas Anant Patil, Shri Bharat Anant Patil, Shri Haji Ali Mohammad Kasum (deceased through LRs), The Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, The Tahsildar @ Agricultural Lands Tribunal, Borivali, The Collector (Mumbai Suburban District), State of Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging orders of tenancy authorities under the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to quash the orders of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Collector, and Tahsildar, and to have the application under Section 32G dismissed.
Filing Reason
The petitioner claimed that the respondents were not tenants and that the tenancy proceedings were based on forged documents and that the land was acquired through a court auction, thus challenging the legality of the purchase price fixation.
Previous Decisions
Tahsildar passed order dated 2-12-2013 allowing Section 32G application; Collector dismissed appeal on 5-2-2015; Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dismissed revision on 28-4-2017.
Issues
Whether the respondents were tenants entitled to the benefit of Section 32G of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948?
Whether the orders of the tenancy authorities suffered from perversity or jurisdictional error warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution?
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 28th April,2017 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Tenancy Revision Application No. 23 of 2015...
The land in dispute is land bearing Survey No.318, Hissa No.7A, area admeasuring 1 Acre 12 Gunthas situated at Village Dahisar, Taluka Borivali...
On 2 nd December, 2013, the learned Tahsildar allowed the said application filed by the respondent nos. 1 to 6 under section 32G of the MTAL Act and fixed the purc...
Procedural History
Administrative suit no.3415 of 1947 filed by legal heirs of Haji Ali Mohammed Haji Cassum; Court Receiver appointed by Bombay High Court in 1950; Court ordered auction sale in 1952; auction held on 29-3-1962, sale confirmed in favour of K. Lalchand for Rs.13,50,000; after his death, Court authorized conveyances to his nominees/heirs in 1970; meanwhile, respondents filed tenancy application under Section 32G before Tahsildar in 1970 for adjacent land and obtained 32M certificate; suo motu proceedings initiated by Tahsildar in 1959 and 1978 but not completed; in 2013, respondents filed fresh application under Section 32G for the suit land; Tahsildar allowed on 2-12-2013; appeal dismissed by Collector on 5-2-2015; revision dismissed by Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on 28-4-2017; writ petition filed under Article 227.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948: Section 32G, Section 74, Section 76
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order XL Rule 1(d)
- Constitution of India: Article 227
