IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.7418 OF 2008 PETITION NO.7418 OF 2008 PETITION NO.7418 OF 2008 Vishnu Appa Bailbhinge & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Jayant Bhagwant Deshpande & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.G.R. Rege i/b. Mr.B.G. Tangsali for the Petitioners. Mr.N.V. Walawalkar i/b. Mr.Ajay A. Joshi for Respondent Nos.1 to 10 and 12. Mr.A.H. Palekar, AGP, for Respondent Nos.27 to 29. CORAM CORAM CORAM : SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. : SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. : SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATE DATE DATE : 14TH NOVEMBER, 2008. : 14TH NOVEMBER, 2008. : 14TH NOVEMBER, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The Petition challenges the order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Mumbai on 25th August, 2008. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that there is no finding at all by any authorities that the petitioners are in unlawful possession of the suit land. This submission is unsustainable. 2. The petitioners in possession are claiming to be the tenants of the suit land. The Tenancy Awal Karkun had arrived at the conclusion that they are not tenants as the person through whom they claimed tenancy, Tayappa, was not a tenant himself. This finding has been upheld right upto the Supreme Court. As a result of this, the land lord filed an application under section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act for summary eviction of unauthorised occupants on their land. The S.D.O. has directed the petitioners to hand over the possession of the suit property. This order has been confirmed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in the Revision Application by rejecting the Revision Application. 3. There is no need to interfere with any of the orders impugned in this Petition. 4. The Petition is rejected. 5. All interim orders stand vacated.