Vithal Patil & Ors Vs. Ambaji Laxman Thakur & Anr  INSC 498 (14 October 1998)
appeal is filed by the heirs of the landlady against the judgment and order
passed by the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No. 3682 of 1981. The High
Court dismissed the writ petition filed by them because the Tehsildar Alibag
the Sub-Divisional Officer, Alibag and the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal have
recorded a concurrent finding that the landlady after obtaining possession from
the tenant under Section 31 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act.
1948 had ceased to cultivate the land personally within the period of 12 years
and therefore the original tenant has become entitled to get back possession of
the said land.
going through the record. we also find that the said finding is not only
supported by the material on record but is also correct. In the record of
rights, in Form No. 12, it is clearly recorded that Pushoalate, married daughter
of the landlady had cultivated the land in 1973 and 1974. That would mean that
the landlady was not cultivating the land personally after obtaining possession
of it from the tenant. The Tehsildar, therefore, was justified in allowing the
application for possession filed by the tenant under Section 37 of the Act. The
appeal, the revision and the writ petition were rightly dismissed> This
appeal is dismissed with on order as to costs.