Shri Kisan Shankar Bamborde ... vs Shri Chandmal Bharmal Jain
2016 Latest Caselaw 1628 Bom

                                                                                  wp3322.14
                                                1



                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                               
                              NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                              WRIT PETITION     No. 3322 OF 2014




                                                       
    Kisan Shankar Bamborde - DEAD
    through L.Rs.




                                                      
    (i)      Gaya Kisan Bamborde,
             aged 65 years.

    (ii)     Laxman Kisan Bamborde




                                              
             aged 43 years.

    (iii) Santosh Kisan Bamborde   
          aged 41 years.

    (iv) Sunil Kisan Bamborde [DEAD]
                                  
             all r/o Chikni, Tah. Ner,
             District Yavatmal.

    (v)      Shalini Madhukar Meshram
      

             aged 45 years,
             r/o c/o P.S. Patil,
   



             Kumbhare Nagar, Gondia.                       .... PETITIONERS.



                                  VERSUS





    Chandmal Bharmal Jain
    aged 90 years, Occupation : Agriculturist,
    r/o Chikni, Tah. Ner, District Yavatmal.
    At present : Karanja (Lad),





    Distt. Washim.                          ....  RESPONDENT.



    Shri Amol Mardikar Advocate for the Petitioners.
    Mr. Ramesh Darda Advocate for the respondent.
                                         .....

                                           CORAM : S.B. SHUKRE, J.

DATED : 18.04.2016.

wp3322.14

ORAL JUDGMENT :

Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard

finally by consent of parties.

2. Upon hearing both the sides, I do not see any

illegality or perversity or arbitrariness in the order impugned in

this petition. It is clear from the order dated 7.2.2000 that the

main issue as to whether the appeal should be treated as filed

either under Section 107 of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural

Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act or under Section 247 of the

Maharashtra Land Revenue Code has not been decided and the

entire case appears to have been decided only on merits.

Therefore, the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal has rightly

remanded the matter back for fresh decision on merits of the

case to the Sub Divisional Officer. I see no merit in the present

writ petition and it deserves to be dismissed. At the same

time, since there has been at least two remands in this case, it

would be necessary to issue direction for expeditious final

disposal of the appeal by the learned Sub Divisional Officer.

3. In the result, writ petition is dismissed. It is directed

wp3322.14

that the Sub Divisional Officer shall dispose of the appeal in

accordance with law and in terms of the order passed by the

Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on 29.10.1998 within four months

from the date of order.

Rule discharged. No costs.

                                  ig                  JUDGE


    /TA/