SITA RAM BHAU PATIL vs RAMCHANDRA NAGO PATIL (DEAD) BY L. Rs. & ANR.

The Supreme Court held that under Section 76 of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, the Revenue Tribunal has the power to interfere with findings of fact, but in this case, the appellant's reliance on an admission was flawed due to three infirmities: the admission was irrelevant, there was no actual admission, and the respondent was not given a chance to address the statement during cross-examination. The Court emphasized that the presumption of correctness of the record of rights is not absolute and can be rebutted by evidence showing inaccuracies. The High Court's decision to set aside the Revenue Tribunal's order was upheld, dismissing the appellant's appeal.