Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute over land bearing Survey No. 235/B, admeasuring 2 Hectares 17 R, situated in Nilanga, Latur. The original petitioner, Vishwanath Dhondiba Davne (since deceased, represented by legal heirs), claimed that he had transferred the land to Shevantabai (original respondent No.1) via a registered sale deed dated 10.01.1975, and her name was mutated in revenue records. Subsequently, on 01.06.2001, Shevantabai executed a Bataipatra (a sharecropping agreement) in favor of the petitioner, creating a contractual tenancy. The petitioner came into possession of the land pursuant to this Bataipatra. The Tahsildar, Nilanga, made a reference under Section 99-A of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950, to determine the tenancy issue. The Tahsildar passed an order on 27.01.2014, which was challenged in appeal before the Deputy Collector (General Administration), Latur, who dismissed the appeal on 14.11.2017. The petitioner then filed a revision before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad, which was also dismissed on 18.10.2019. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The legal issue was whether the Bataipatra created a valid contractual tenancy under Section 4-A of the Act. The court considered the submissions of both sides. The petitioner argued that the Bataipatra was a valid contract creating tenancy rights, while the respondents contended otherwise. The court analyzed the provisions of Section 4-A, which recognizes contractual tenancies, and held that the Bataipatra, being a written agreement for cultivation on shares, falls within the definition of a contractual tenancy. The court set aside the orders of the Tahsildar, Deputy Collector, and the Tribunal, and directed that the reference under Section 99-A be answered in the affirmative, recognizing the petitioner as a tenant. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Tenancy Law - Contractual Tenancy - Bataipatra - Section 4-A Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 - The petitioner claimed tenancy rights based on a Bataipatra executed in 2001 by the deceased respondent, who had purchased the land in 1975. The court examined whether the Bataipatra created a valid contractual tenancy under Section 4-A of the Act. Held that the Bataipatra, being a written agreement for cultivation on shares, constitutes a contractual tenancy recognized under Section 4-A, and the petitioner is entitled to protection as a tenant. (Paras 3-5) B) Tenancy Law - Reference under Section 99-A - Jurisdiction of Revenue Tribunal - Section 99-A Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 - The Tahsildar made a reference under Section 99-A to determine the tenancy issue. The Deputy Collector and the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dismissed the petitioner's claim. The High Court set aside those orders and held that the reference must be answered in favor of the petitioner, recognizing the tenancy. (Paras 2-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Bataipatra dated 01.06.2001 executed by the deceased respondent in favor of the petitioner creates a valid contractual tenancy under Section 4-A of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950, and whether the reference under Section 99-A of the Act was properly answered.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The orders dated 27.01.2014 passed by the Tahsildar, Nilanga, 14.11.2017 passed by the Deputy Collector (General Administration), Latur, and 18.10.2019 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad, are quashed and set aside. The reference under Section 99-A of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 is answered in the affirmative, holding that the Bataipatra dated 01.06.2001 creates a valid contractual tenancy in favor of the petitioner. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Contractual tenancy
- Bataipatra
- Section 4-A Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act
- 1950
- Section 99-A reference
- Tenancy rights
- Revenue Tribunal jurisdiction
