"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

Tenancy Rights on Watan Lands Protected Post Abolition Act: Supreme Court Upholds Tenants’ Right to Purchase”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court, in a significant judgment, upheld the rights of tenants over ‘Watan’ lands, post the implementation of the Maharashtra Revenue Patels (Abolition of Offices) Act, 1962, emphasizing the continued protection of tenancy rights and the right to purchase such lands. The Bench of Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar delivered the landmark verdict in the case of Baban Balaji More (Dead) by LRs. & others v. Babaji Hari Shelar (Dead) by LRs. & others.

The crux of the judgment revolved around the interpretation and harmonious construction of three vintage legislations: the Maharashtra Hereditary Offices Act, 1874; the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948; and the Maharashtra Revenue Patels (Abolition of Offices) Act, 1962. The central issue was whether the tenancy rights over lands held under Watan status were legally valid on the date of the Abolition Act’s enactment.

The dispute involved the tenancy of Watan lands in the village of Chikhali. The tenants, predecessors of the respondents, were cultivating the lands since around 1955-56. After the original Watandar’s death, his legal heirs sought to reclaim possession under the 1874 Act. The conflict escalated through various legal channels, ultimately bringing into question the applicability of the Tenancy Act and the effect of the Abolition Act on the tenancy rights.

Validity of Tenancy Rights: The Supreme Court meticulously analyzed the three legislations. It concluded that the tenants’ rights were protected under the Tenancy Act and continued to subsist post the enactment of the Abolition Act. The Court emphasized, “The limited exemption from certain provisions of the Tenancy Act, afforded by Section 88CA thereof, continued until the Abolition Act came into force on 01.01.1963. Thereafter, as the very institution of Patel Watan stood abolished, the limited exemption extended to such Watan lands under Section 88CA of the Tenancy Act also ceased.”

Right to Purchase: The Court upheld the tenants’ right to purchase the Watan lands, recognizing the transition of their legal status following the regrant after the Abolition Act. The judgment clarified, “That right became operational on 27.11.1964, when these Watan lands were regranted to the heirs of the original Watandar.”

Invalidity of Orders under 1874 Act: The Court held that the orders under Sections 5, 11, and 11A of the 1874 Act concerning the recovery of possession from tenants were invalid after the introduction of the Tenancy Act.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the tenants’ rights to purchase the tenanted agricultural Watan lands under the Tenancy Act following the enactment of the Abolition Act. The parties were directed to bear their own costs.

Date of Decision: March 14, 2024

Baban Balaji More (Dead) by LRs. & others v. Babaji Hari Shelar (Dead) by LRs. & others

Similar News