Bhaskar S/O Vishambhar Wankhede ... vs Anuradha Vijaykant Wankhede And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6955 Bom

                                                    1/2                       953-WP 4100.2022

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                     WRIT PETITION NO. 4100 OF 2022
                 Bhaskar s/o Bishambhar Wankhede and others
                                      vs.
                 Sau. Anuradha Vijaykant Wankhede and others
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. V. R. Thote, Advocate for petitioners. Ms. T. H. Khan, AGP for respondent No.5.

                                         CORAM         :          MANISH PITALE J.
                                         DATE          :          20/07/2022

In this petition, a specific contention is raised on behalf of the petitioner that the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer exercising revisional powers under Section 23 of the Mamlatdars Courts Act, 1906 was without jurisdiction. In the present case, admittedly, the petitioners themselves have invoked revisional jurisdiction before the Sub-Divisional Officer. A judgment of this Case in the case of Ramesh Damu Patil vs. Purushottam Umrao Chavan and others 2017(5) ALL MR 154, was relied upon.

KOLHE 2/2 953-WP 4100.2022

2. But on a specific query put to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that as to how this argument would help the petitioners on the merits of the matter, because Tahsildar admittedly exercised power under Section 5 of the said Act against the petitioners and specifically directed them to remove obstruction and grant use of existing way to the contesting respondent. Upon this, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he only wanted setting aside of the order passed in revision by the Sub-Divisional Officer, so as to enable the petitioners to knock the doors of the authority which has jurisdiction under Section 23 to entertain such a revision application.

3. At this stage, learned AGP appearing on behalf of the respondent No.5 submitted that perhaps there are contra judgments on the aforesaid issue and that if a short adjournment is granted, they could be brought to the notice of this Court.

4. In view of the above, adjourned to 25/07/2022.

JUDGE

Digitally signed byRAVIKANT CHANDRAKANT KOLHE Signing Date:21.07.2022 11:03

KOLHE