JUDGMENT 1. Heard. Rule was issued on 22nd December, 1998. Interim stay as regards possession was directed. 2. The petitioners assert to be the tenants on the agriculture field owned by Smt. Bhimabai. The legal representatives of Bhimabai have taken up the matter and likewise the legal representatives of one Dadaji(tenant) are prosecuting on behalf of tenants. 3. The controversy basically was about the rentals to be of three khandies paddy(Dhan), it was resolved and consequently accepted. The learned counsel for the writ petitioners/tenants informs that reading of Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land(Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958(hereinafter referred to as "the said Act", for the sake of brevity), even taking effect of Section 13(3)(a) of the said Act into consideration, the overriding effect of Section 11 which deals with levying maximum rent, and start with non abstante clause will prevail. Section 11 conceive as under : 11. "Notwithstanding any agreement, or usage or any decree or order of a court or any law, the maximum rent payable by a tenant shall not exceed (a) three times the land revenue on the land in respect of which announcement of the Settlement has been made at any time within[ thirty five years] immediately proceeding the commencement of this Act or is made at any time after such commencement; (b) four time the land revenue on the land in any other case" While Section 12 provide as under : 12. "The rent payable by a tenant shall, subject to the maximum fixed under Section 11, be the rent agreed upon between such tenant and his landlord or in the absence of any such agreement the rent payable according to the usage of the locality or if there is no such agreement or usage, or where there is a dispute as regards the reasonableness of the rent payable according to such agreement or usage, the reasonable rent determined by the Tahsildar in the prescribed manner having regard to the rents prevalent in the locality, the productivity of the land, the prices of commodities and other factors as may be prescribed : Provided that the Tahsildar may after inquiry on an application by the tenant or landlord at any time during the currency of the tenancy, (i) reduce the rent, if he is satisfied that on account of the deterioration of the land by flood, or other cause beyond the control of the tenant, the land has been wholly or partially rendered unfit for cultivation, or (ii) subject to the provisions of section, enhance the rent, if he is satisfied that on account of any improvement made in the land, at the expense of the landlord, there has been an increase in the agricultural produce thereof". Section 13 speaks of commutation of rent in Crop share into cash rent. 4. Having read these three provisions in juxta position and construction thereof, I am of the view that the effect of Section 11 will have overriding consequences to Section 12 and 13 thereof. Section 15 provides refund of rent recovered in contravention of the provisions of the said Act. However, that is to be taken into consideration on application of the aggrieved parties/tenants. The language of Section 11 is of wide amplitude. It is a matter of record, notices of demand were issued by the landlord specifying the rental as three khandies paddy(dhan). That could not be in tune with Section 11, which specifies maximum rent. The right to receive rent/lease money, would naturally be guided by overriding effect of section 11, irrespective of agreement to pay 3 khandis of Dhan. The liability of the tenant, due to legislative mandate would not travel and bind him to discharge the so called rentals of 3 khandis Dhan. 5. The right to receive rent/lease money, would naturally be guided by overriding effect of section 11, irrespective of agreement to pay 3 khandis of Dhan. The liability of the tenant, due to legislative mandate would not travel and bind him to discharge the so called rentals of 3 khandis Dhan. 5. It is informed that the tenants had moved an application under Section 13(1)(2) of the said Act, which they failed to get redress. 6. The impact of Section 11 to Section 12 of the said Act are not touched and considered by the learned Member of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Nagpur(for short MRT), while negativing the contentions agitated by the tenants/writ petitioners. It is a matter of record, the writ petitioner, before the Sub Divisional Officer has set up his plea of challenge in terms of Section 4 and Section 11, about entitlement of the landlord to collect and get rentals in terms of crop and that too three khandies of paddy(dhan). 7. The writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned order passed by the learned Member, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Nagpur, is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the learned Member, MRT, who will independently decide the respective claims and contentions of the parties on available records and in particular, in the light of legal position and observations made hereinabove and also observations of this Court in Special Civil Application No. 288/1970 decided on 8th September, 1971. 8. Interim relief granted by this Court to remain in force till 13th August, 2010. The tenants to apply to the learned Member, MRT for further interim protection. The parties to appear before the learned Member, MRT, Nagpur, on 8th July, 2010. 9. The rule is made partly absolute to the aforesaid extent.