:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2335 OF 1988 1. Shri Hari Ninu Ghode since deceased by his heirs - 1A) Shri Shankar Hari Ghode 1B) Shri Shiva Hari Ghode 1C) Shri Sambha Hari Ghode 1D) Smt. Shantabai Keshav Dhumal since deceased by her heirs - 1D(i) Keshav Krishnaji Dhumal aged 70 yrs. at and post Shirala, Tal-Shirala, Dist. Sangli. 1D(ii) Ashok Keshav Dhumal, aged 42 yrs. Vheternety Doctor, Varna Dudh Dairy, AT & Post Kodoli, Tal-Panhala, Dist.Kolhapur. 1D(iii)Jayashree Tanaji Gaikwad (daughter) aged 38 yrs. residing at Parsi Panchayat Road, Shamlal Chawl, R.No.20, Andheri (E), Mumbai - 93. 1E) Smt. Kisabai Keshav Wagh 1F) Smt. Majula Narayan Patil 1G) Smt. Laxmibai @ Sonabai Shankar More. 1A to 1C, 1E and 1G residents of Kokrud, Tahsild Shirala, District Sangli. No.1F resident of Kotoli, Tahsil Shahuwadi, Dist.Kolhapur .. Petitioners Vs. 1) Smt. Jagubai Shivaling Takale 2) Smt. Indubai Sadashiv Mahajan :2: since deceased by her heirs - A) Arun Sadashiv Mahajan B) Uday Sadashiv Mahajan C) Sanjay Sadashiv Mahajan D) Shivanand Sadashiv Mahajan Nos.2A to 2D Resident of Kokrud, Tahsil Shirala, Dist. Sangli. 3) Smt. Draupadibai Vishnu Kore No.1 resident of Shaniwar Peth, Thorat Building at and post Karad, Dist. Satara. No.3 resident of Kokrud, Tahsild-Shirala, Dist.Sangli. .. Respondents Mr. B.R. Patil for petitioners. (Petition is dismissed for want of prosecution against respondent no.1 vide Addl. Registrar’s order dated 22/12/94 in C.A.No.6860/94). Mr. Bhushan Walimbe for respondent nos.2(A), 2(C) and 2(D) and 3. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, J. Date : April 01, 2008. Date : April 01, 2008. Date : April 01, 2008. ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. The factual matrix leading to this petition is that the present respondents who are the landlords had submitted an Application under Section 33-B of the :3: Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (the Act for short) for restoration of the lands for the personal bonafide cultivation. The details of the land located in Kokrud Village, Taluka Shirala, District Sangli are as under:- Survey No. Area Assessment ---------- ---- ---------- a) 267/2 0-19 R 4-75 b) 267/5 0-19 R 4-75 . Notices were issued to the original opponents - present petitioners and finally the application registered as Tenancy Case No. 2 of 1966 came to be allowed by the Tenancy Awal Karkun, Shirala on 21/7/1981. The petitioners filed Tenancy Appeal No. 28 of 1982 under Section 74 of the Act before the Sub Divisional Officer, Walwa Division, Sangli. The said appeal came to be dismissed on 7/2/1986 and, therefore, the petitioners filed a Revision Application registered as MRT-SS-66/1986. The said Revision Application was also dismissed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Kolhapur on 18/1/1988 :4: and hence this petition. 2. In Tenancy Case No. 2 of 1966, the Awal Karkun held that the applicants are certified landlady and the opponents were in possession of the suit land for cultivation. The applicants had given notice to the cultivators as required under the Act and the suit filed by the applicants. He further held that the suit was filed in time and the subject land stood in the name of the applicants or their ancestral as on 1/1/1952 and thereafter. It was further held that the applicants did not obtain possession of the land as per Section 31 of the Act. The applicants had made out the case of personal bonafide cultivation and the land stood in the name of Government as per Mutation Entry No. 2032, the application was not required to be dismissed. In Appeal before the SDO, the SDO also referred to Mutation Entry No. 2032 which was effected on 25/10/1955 whereby the Government’s name was entered under Section 88(1)(a) and Section 33-A of the Act. It appears that the landlady had also obtained 88-C certificate which was confirmed by the Lower Appellate Authority and the same was challenged :5: before this court in Special Civil Application No. 275 of 1969 which was decided on 3/5/1975. In the said order it was noted that the certificate holders had become certified landlords and tenants had become excluded tenants. It was also noted that the present petitioners were Mirashi tenants and their rights are saved under Section 8 of the Bombay Paragana and Kulkarni Watans Abolition Act. The Lower Appellate Court i.e. SDO also agreed with the findings recorded by the Awal Karkun and was pleased to dismiss the appeal. In the revision application, the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal agreed with the view of both the Awal Karkun as well as the SDO. 3. Exemption Certificate was received by the landlords on 13/1/1966 and thereafter the notice was issued to the opponents i.e. present petitioners on 24/3/1966 and the same was issued within the prescribed period as per the provisions of the Act. The landlords’ names were entered in the record of right in respect of subject land. Shri Dattu Shirambekar, the father of the respondents did not only remain as mirashi tenant but had become the full :6: owner of the suit lands. In any case the finding recorded by this court in Special Civil Application No. 275 of 1969 had reached finality and the concurrent view taken by all the three authorities below i.e. Awal Karkun, SDO and the MRT is based on the said findings of this court. In these obtaining circumstances, it cannot be said that the concurrent view taken by all the authorities below suffers from any errors or perversity calling for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution. 4. Consequently, this petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged. Ad-interim order stands vacated. (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)