http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

PETITIONER: JITENDRASINGH JAYSINGH RAWAL ETC

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       24/09/1998

BENCH: G.T.NANAVATI, S.P.KURDUKAR

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: Present: Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.T.Nanavati Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.P.Kurdukar V.N.Ganpule, Sr.Adv., Manoj Kumar  Mishra  and  Sunil  Jain, Advs.  with him for the appellants M.S.Nargolkar, Sr.Adv., D.M.Nargolkar, Adv., A.M.Khanwilkar, Adv. (NP) with him for the Respondents  JUDGEMENT The following Judgment of the Court was delivered: Nanavati J The only question that arises for  consideration  in these  appeals  is whether the appellants were the owners of lands bearing Survey Nos.284/1, 286, 291/A, 292/2,  283  and 291/B or  whether  Zipabai  was  the  owner  thereof.    The Commissioner in the revisional  proceedings  held  that  the appellants were  the  owners  and  not  Zipabal.  Therefore, those lands were included in the holdings of the appellants. The High Court also on consideration of the record  and  the material  placed  before  it held that the two gift deeds of 1970 were not valid and the lands continued to be the  lands of the  original landholder.  Thus, the Commissioner and the High Court have held that the said lands really belonged  to the appellants and, therefore, they were rightly included in the   holdings   of   the  appellants  for  the  purpose  of determining surplus land held by them.  These were questions of fact and the Commissioner and the High Court have rightly decided them.  No intereference is therefore, called for  by this court.  These appeals are dismissed with on order as to costs.