2001 (10) TMI 1103 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether by not indicating his intention to avail the right to purchase the lands in dispute under section 32, conferred on the first under clause (b) of the proviso to clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 88 of Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 within the specified period, will he lose the right? Held that - Appeal allowed partly. The first respondent had the right to purchase the lands in dispute till October 1, 1959 but as not having exercised the right to purchase the lands in dispute from the landlord within the statutory period of one year, the first respondent has lost the right to purchase the land in dispute and therefore he cannot have the price of the land fixed under Section 32-G after about 10 years of the expiry of the statutory period. On this aspect the order of the High Court, under challenge, is liable to be set aside.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Tenant's right to purchase the land.
2. Interpretation of Section 88(1)(d) of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.
3. Consequences of not exercising the right to purchase within the specified period.
4. The distinction between deemed purchaser and the right to purchase.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Tenant's Right to Purchase the Land:
The primary dispute revolves around the tenant's right to purchase the agricultural lands under the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The tenant claimed to be in possession of the lands and sought to exercise his right to purchase under Section 32-G of the Act. The appellants contested this, arguing that the tenant had not exercised this right within the specified period, thus losing the right to purchase.

2. Interpretation of Section 88(1)(d) of the Act:
Section 88(1)(d) of the Act exempts certain lands from the application of the Act's provisions while under government management. The proviso to this section states that once the land is released from government management, all provisions of the Act apply, subject to modifications. Specifically, it allows the landlord to terminate the tenancy within one year and gives the tenant the right to purchase the land within one year from the expiry of the landlord's right to terminate. The court examined whether the tenant's failure to exercise this right within the specified period resulted in losing the right to purchase.

3. Consequences of Not Exercising the Right to Purchase Within the Specified Period:
The court held that the tenant must exercise the right to purchase the land within the specified period and give intimation to the landlord and the Tribunal. Failure to do so results in the loss of the right to purchase. The court emphasized that the tenant's right to purchase is not automatic and must be actively exercised within the statutory period. The tenant's application for fixation of the purchase price filed in 1968 was deemed ineffective as it was made about ten years after the expiry of the statutory period.

4. The Distinction Between Deemed Purchaser and the Right to Purchase:
The court differentiated between a tenant deemed to have purchased the land under Section 32 and a tenant who has the right to purchase the land. A deemed purchaser automatically becomes the owner on the specified date, while a tenant with the right to purchase must exercise this right within the specified period. The court clarified that the tenant in this case did not become a deemed purchaser simply because the landlord did not terminate the tenancy within the prescribed period. The tenant's failure to exercise the right to purchase within the specified period meant he remained a tenant and did not acquire ownership of the land.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order, holding that the tenant's failure to exercise the right to purchase within the specified period resulted in the loss of that right. The tenant could not claim to be a deemed purchaser or have the purchase price fixed under Section 32-G after the statutory period had expired. The appeals were partly allowed, and the order under challenge was set aside to the extent indicated.