Case Note & Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging an order dated 10.8.1998 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal at Pune in Revision Application No. TNCB 255 of 1995. The Tribunal had allowed the revision and set aside the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer (S.D.O.) in Tenancy Appeal No. 14 of 1994 dated 31.3.1995, which had held that the petitioner was a tenant. The Tribunal primarily relied on an exemption certificate issued under Section 88-B of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 in favor of the respondents, and also noted that the suit land was the property of the respondent Trust, thus no landlord-tenant relationship existed. However, the court observed that in a related writ petition (No.2200 of 1991), a judgment was rendered today holding that the exemption certificate under Section 88-B was to be set aside and that the suit land was not the property of the respondent Trust as on 1.4.1957. Applying the same reasoning, the court found the Tribunal's order unsustainable and suffering from manifest errors. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, and the impugned order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal was quashed and set aside.
Headnote
A) Tenancy Law - Exemption Certificate - Section 88-B Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Validity of Exemption Certificate - The Tribunal relied on an exemption certificate under Section 88-B to hold that no landlord-tenant relationship existed. However, in a related writ petition (No.2200 of 1991), the court directed that the exemption certificate be set aside and held that the suit land was not the property of the respondent Trust as on 1.4.1957. Consequently, the Tribunal's reasoning was unsustainable and the impugned order suffered from manifest errors. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal erred in relying on an exemption certificate under Section 88-B of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 to deny the petitioner's tenancy rights, when the suit land was not the property of the respondent Trust as on 1.4.1957.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 10.8.1998 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal is quashed and set aside.
Law Points
- Exemption certificate under Section 88-B of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act
- 1948 cannot be sustained if the land was not the property of the trust on the specified date
- Landlord-tenant relationship can exist despite exemption certificate if the land is not trust property
- Supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution can be exercised to correct manifest errors in Tribunal orders
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (04) 203
Writ Petition No. 5140 of 1999
Mr. L.S. Gaikwad for Petitioners, Ms. Smita Mane h/f Prafulla B. Shah for Respondents
Ananda Narayan alias Yadu Amrale and others
Vasudeo Atmaram Gosavi and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging an order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in a tenancy revision.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of the Tribunal's order dated 10.8.1998 which set aside the S.D.O.'s order holding the petitioner as tenant.
Filing Reason
The Tribunal allowed the revision by relying on an exemption certificate under Section 88-B and holding that the suit land was trust property, thereby denying the petitioner's tenancy rights.
Previous Decisions
The S.D.O. in Tenancy Appeal No. 14 of 1994 on 31.3.1995 held that the petitioner was a tenant. The Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No. TNCB 255 of 1995 on 10.8.1998 set aside the S.D.O.'s order.
Issues
Whether the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal erred in relying on an exemption certificate under Section 88-B of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 to deny the petitioner's tenancy rights.
Whether the suit land was the property of the respondent Trust as on 1.4.1957.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the Tribunal's order was unsustainable as the exemption certificate was invalid and the land was not trust property.
Respondents supported the Tribunal's order relying on the exemption certificate and trust ownership.
Ratio Decidendi
The exemption certificate under Section 88-B of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 cannot be sustained if the suit land was not the property of the trust as on 1.4.1957. The Tribunal's reliance on such certificate to deny tenancy rights is erroneous and the order suffers from manifest errors warranting correction under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Judgment Excerpts
For the reasons set out in the judgment rendered today in writ petition No.2200 of 1991, the reasoning given by the Tribunal in support of the impugned order is unsustainable and therefore, the said order suffers from manifest errors calling for correction in the supervisory powers of this Court.
Hence, this petition succeeds and the same is hereby allowed. The impugned order dated 10.8.1998 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal is hereby quashed and set aside.
Procedural History
The S.D.O. in Tenancy Appeal No. 14 of 1994 on 31.3.1995 held the petitioner as tenant. The respondents filed Revision Application No. TNCB 255 of 1995 before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, which allowed the revision on 10.8.1998, setting aside the S.D.O.'s order. The petitioners then filed Writ Petition No. 5140 of 1999 under Article 227 of the Constitution before the Bombay High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948: 88-B
- Constitution of India: 227
