Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sidappa Padmanna Berad, a former Sanadi Inamdar, filed a writ petition challenging the appellate order of the Special Land Acquisition Officer No.5, Kolhapur dated 11.6.1984. By that order, the appellate court set aside the lower court's order and remanded the matter for fixing the purchase price of the land by the respondent tenant under Section 32H of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The petitioner contended that the respondent was not a tenant and there was no landlord-tenant relationship. However, the Court noted that the lands in question were resumed from the petitioner and granted to the respondent. In an inquiry before the Special Tahsildar, the respondent was held to be a tenant by order dated 1.4.1957. Further, an order under Section 32IB of the Act dated 30.9.1972 attained finality as the petitioner did not appeal. Additionally, in Tenancy Case No.12/71, the Tenancy Aval Karkoon, Shirol, found the respondent to be a tenant, which was also not challenged. The petitioner argued before the appellate court that the respondent had not given notice under Section 32F(1A), but the Court held that section inapplicable as the petitioner was not under disability. The Court also observed that the land, originally sanadi inam, had turned full rayatava, and under Section 88, the tenancy provisions apply, giving the tenant a right to purchase. Finding no error of law, the Court dismissed the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Tenancy Law - Purchase Price Fixation - Section 32H Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Remand Order - The petitioner, a former Sanadi Inamdar, challenged the appellate order remanding the matter for fixing purchase price of land by the respondent tenant. The Court held that the respondent's status as tenant had been conclusively determined in earlier proceedings and the petitioner had not challenged those findings. The appellate order was found to be without error. (Paras 1-5) B) Tenancy Law - Applicability to Inam Lands - Section 88 Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Once land turned rayatava, tenancy provisions apply - The Court noted that the land, originally sanadi inam, had turned full rayatava, and under Section 88, the provisions of the Act apply, entitling the tenant to purchase the land. (Para 4) C) Tenancy Law - Notice under Section 32F(1A) - Not applicable to persons not under disability - The petitioner's argument that the respondent failed to give notice under Section 32F(1A) was rejected as the petitioner was not a person under disability. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellate order remanding the matter for fixing purchase price under Section 32H of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 suffers from any error of law warranting interference under writ jurisdiction.
Final Decision
Writ Petition dismissed. No error of law apparent on the face of the record. Appellate order upheld.
Law Points
- Tenancy rights
- Purchase price fixation
- Resumption of inam lands
- Applicability of tenancy provisions to rayatava lands
- Finality of tenancy findings
