Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Kacharu B. Ambekar and others, are the successors-in-interest of the original landlord of agricultural lands bearing Gat No.333 (47 Ares) and Gat No.323 (70 Ares) situated at village Vinchur Dalvi, Taluka Sinnar, District Nashik. The respondents are the successors-in-interest of the original tenant, Late Bhairu Tukaram Shelke, who was in cultivation of the suit lands since 1953-1954. The dispute arose when the respondents filed an application under Section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Niphad Division, seeking restoration of possession of the suit lands. The SDO, by order dated 30th November 1993, rejected the application. Aggrieved, the respondents filed Revision Application No. Tenancy A.70/1994 before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Bombay. The MRT, by judgment and order dated 24th November 1995, allowed the revision and set aside the SDO's order, thereby granting restoration of possession to the respondents. The petitioners challenged the MRT's order before the Bombay High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The core legal issue was whether the MRT could set aside the SDO's order without issuing notice to the landlord and affording an opportunity of hearing. The petitioners argued that the MRT's order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice as they were not heard. The respondents did not appear. The court analyzed the provisions of Section 84 of the Act and held that the MRT, while exercising revisional jurisdiction, ought to have issued notice to the landlord before setting aside the SDO's order. The court found that the MRT's order was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, which vitiated the order. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, set aside the MRT's order, and remanded the matter back to the MRT for fresh consideration after issuing notice to all parties.
Headnote
A) Tenancy Law - Restoration of Possession - Section 84 Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Natural Justice - The MRT allowed revision and set aside SDO's order rejecting restoration of possession without issuing notice to the landlord. Held that the order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice as the landlord was not heard. (Paras 1-15) B) Tenancy Law - Revision - Section 84 Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Opportunity of Hearing - The MRT exercised revisional jurisdiction under Section 84 and reversed the SDO's order. Held that the MRT ought to have issued notice to the landlord before setting aside the order, as the landlord had a right to be heard. (Paras 1-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal could set aside the SDO's order rejecting restoration of possession under Section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, without issuing notice to the landlord and affording an opportunity of hearing.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The judgment and order dated 24th November 1995 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No. Tenancy A.70/1994 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the MRT for fresh consideration after issuing notice to all the parties and affording an opportunity of hearing.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- opportunity of hearing
- Section 84 Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act
- 1948
- restoration of possession
- revision jurisdiction
- Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal
