1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6064 OF 2011. _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|_______________________________________ CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 17.08.2011. 1. Heard. 2. The present Respondent had filed a tenancy application seeking possession of the land on the ground of arrears of rent and the tenant is not cultivating the land personally. The Tahsildar allowed the application. The present petitioners preferred appeal before the Sub- Divisional Officer, who dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed Revision before the Revenue Commissioner. The Commissioner partly allowed the Revision and remanded the matter back to the Tahsildar. The 2 said order is assailed by the petitioners. 3. Mr.Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that initially even the Sub- Divisional Officer had remanded the matter back to the Tahsildar, wherein he had observed that the Respondent had not produced the registration of the Trust. In such circumstances, there is no propriety to again remand the matter back to the Tahsildar on the same issue. According to the learned counsel, when the Trust has not produced the registration certificate then the consequences should follow and more opportunity was not required to be given to the Respondent for the same purpose. That would amount to filling in the laches. 4. The petitioners have approached this Court against the order of remand. The MRT in the impugned judgment has observed that the authorities have not decided the issue as to the date and order of the registration of the Trust. Whether it was registered in the year 1957 or in the year 1953. The authorities who are fact finding authorities are expected to give a clear 3 finding on the basis of evidence and the documents on record. As the said finding was not given, the MRT has remanded the matter. The finding on the same would be relevant and material for the adjudication of the dispute. Even the petitioner would have an opportunity to controvert the case of the Respondent. The order does not suffer from any error of jurisdiction. The Writ Petition is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.17.08.2011. asp/office/wp6064.11 4