LexSADASHIV DADA PATIL versus PURSHOTTAM ONKAR PATIL (D) BY LRS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
- A SADASHIV DADA PATIL v. PURSHOTTAM ONKARPATIL (D) BY LRS. SEPTS:MBER 29, 2006 B [S.B.SINHA AND DAL VEER BHANDARI, JJ.] Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948-Sections 2(2), 2(8), 2(9), 31, 32, 32-G and 32-0-Tenancy Act conferring certain statutory rights upon tenant-Section 8 of 1962 Act making existing tenancy law C applicable in respect of watan /and-Landlord contending that Section 8 • read with proviso appended thereto provides only prospective effect-Held, provisions of both the Acts are required to be construed harmoniously- Proviso may create an exception but ordinarily does not create a right or takes away a vested or accrued right-'-Proviso appended to Section 8 of D 1962 Act has limited role to play and does not create any right in favour of the landlord nor does it take away vested right of the tenant conferred under the Tenancy Act-Proviso merely postponed operation of the statute- Maharashtra Revenue Patels (Abolition of Office) Act, 1962-lnterpretation of Statutes. Ancestors qf appellant were seized and possessed of watait lands and were known as Watandars and land was cla~silied as 'Patil Inam Land of Class E VI. 8'. Ancestor of respondent was inducted as tenant. Respondent served notice upon appellant-landlord expressing his desire to pay the purchase price ofland in terms of Section 32-G of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. Tehsildar dropped proceedings opining that notice had not been F given within one year from date thereof as contemplated under Section 32-0 thereof. Respondent filed appeal and Appellate Authority opined that provisions of Section 32-0 of the Tenancy Act were not applicable and tenant. was entitled to purchase the tenanted land in terms of Section 32-G thereof. ·Revision application filed by appellant before Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal G was allowed. Respondent filed writ petition challenging the order -OfTribunal which was allowed and Single Judge held that Section 32-0 of the Tenancy Act was not applicable. Letters Patent Appeal preferred by appellant was · dismissed by Division Bench. Renee the present appeal. 843 H 844 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2006] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. A Appellant contended that High Court committed error in holding that Section 32-0 of the Tenancy Act was not applicable ; and that Section 8 of Maharashtra Revenue Patels (Abolition of Office) Act, 1962 must be read with the proviso appended thereto and so construed the same gives only prospective effect to Section 8. B Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD :1.1. Indisputably, the rights and obligations of the parties were governed by the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act. Section 31 thereof entitled the watandar to serve a notice upon the tenant to hand over vacant possession to him of the tenanted land, if the land was required for one C or the other purposes mentioned therein. Such a notice was to be served on or before 31.12.1956. It is not contended that Respondent was served with such a notice. No proceeding was initiated before 31.3.1957. The tenancy, therefore, continued. (850-E, F, GI 1.2. If a person remained a tenant on 1.4.1957, by reason of the legal D fiction created under Section 32 of the Tenancy Act, he would be deemed to have purchased the land from his landlord, free from all encumbrances subsisting thereon on the said date. Section 32-G thereof, on the other hand, casts an obligation on the Tribunal. The Tribunal is required to publish or cause to be published a public notice in the prescribed form calling upon the tenants who under Section 32 of the Tenancy Act are deemed to have purchased E the land. Section 32-0 contains a no11-obstante clause providing notwithstanding any agreement or usage to the contrary, a tenant cultivating personally would be entitled within one year from the commencement of such tenancy to purchase from the landlord the land held by him or such part thereof as will raise the holding of the tenant to the ceiling area.· F (850-G, H; 851-A-BI G 2. Section 8 of the Maharashtra Revenue Patels (Abolition of Office) Act, 1962 provides that the rights and liabilities of the holder of such land and his tenant or tenants shall, subject to the provisions of the said part, be governed by the provisions of the tenancy law. (851-B, q 3.1. The provisions of both the Acts are required to be construed harmoniously. They have to be construed keeping in view the purport and object
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.