1 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9235 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. A.G. Toraskar for the petitioners. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 14TH JUNE 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. By this petition, the petitioners challenge the order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”) confirming the order of the Sub-Divisional Registrar which in turn confirms the orders of the Tahsildar declaring the respondent to be a tenant of the suit land. 3. The present petitioners are the heirs of Dhondu Babu Lad, who was the owner of the 2 land. Respondents are heirs of Narayan. Narayan, who is the original tenant, made an application for declaring him to be a tenant. Statement of Narayan was recorded in which he stated that he was a tenant for 40 years and was in actual possession and cultivation of the land. Thereafter the statement of Dhondu, the owner of the was land, was recorded who in his examination in chief itself admitted that Narayan was the tenant and was in possession of the land. Accordingly, an order was passed by the Tahsildar. The appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the Sub-Divisional Officer and the decision has been affirmed by the Tribunal. 4. The appeal was dismissed not only on the ground that it was barred by limitation, but also on merits. The appellate authority has held that the statement given by Dhondu, the original owner and father of the petitioner no.1, was binding on his heirs, i.e. the petitioners. 3 Thus, it has not been dismissed only on the ground of limitation but also on merits. The finding that the respondent was a tenant is a finding of fact based on appreciation of evidence and on admission of the original owner and requires no interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. The writ petition is rejected summarily. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)