1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6158 OF 2009 Madhukar Walku Patil ........Petitioner versus Kashinath Laxman Bhide since deceased through L.Rs. 1.1 Madhav Kashinath Bhide & ors ........Respondents. Mr. V.D. Gautam i/b Rahul Narlekar adv. for the Petitioner. Mr. P.M. Pradhan i/b. S.S. Patil adv. for the Respondents. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI,J. DATED : 6th September, 2010. P.C.: 1. The petition challenges the concurrent orders passed by the learned Tahasildar dated 15-3-2002 and MRT dated 30-3-2009 thereby rejecting the application filed by the present petitioner under sec.70 -B of the B.T. & A.L. Act 1948 and the appeal filed by the present petitioner and the revision respectively. 2. It is the contention of the petitioner that the authorities below have failed to take into consideration the evidence on record which would show that initially the father of the petitioner was the tenant and subsequently the petitioner was cultivating the land as a tenant. 3. The scope of interference by this court in its extra ordinary jurisdiction under article 227 is very limited. It would not be permissible for this court to re-appreciate the evidence at 2 this stage. No perversity or infirmity noticed in the concurrent orders warranting interference by this court. Petition is therefore dismissed. (B. R. GAVAI, J.)