Bombay High Court
Mangala Mangesh Mhatre vs Laxman Chintaman Vaidya Since Thr Legal ... on 24 January, 2024
Author: Gauri Godse
Bench: Gauri Godse
902-WP-7240.23.docx
Gayatri IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 7240 OF 2023
Mangala Mangesh Mhatre ... Petitioner
Vs.
Laxman Chintaman Vaidya (since deceased)
through LRS and Others ...Respondents
Mr. K. S. Dewal i/b Mr. Yash Dewal and Mr. Sham Thakur, Advocate for
the Petitioner.
CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J.
DATE : 24th JANUARY 2024
P.C.
1. Notice is already issued to the respondents on 21 st June 2023,
however, service report of court notice is awaited. Await service till 23 rd
February 2024.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is insisting for passing an
interim order in terms of prayer clause (b) which reads as under:-
902-WP-7240.23.docx
"b) Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ
petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay
the operation, implementation and effect of the
Impugned Order dated 16th January 2023 passed by
the Hon'ble President, Maharashtra Revenue
Tribunal, Mumbai in TNC/REV/RAG/44 of 2022 and
Judgment and Order dated 25 th January 2022
passed by the passed by the Id. Sub-Divisional
Officer, Alibaug in Remand Tenancy Appeal No. 39
of 2018;"
3. By the interim prayer, the petitioner is seeking stay of the
execution and operation of the impugned order. By order dated 16 th
January 2023, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal ("MRT") has dismissed
Revision Application filed by the petitioner for challenging the order
dated 25th January 2022 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer ("SDO").
By order dated 25th January 2023, SDO has allowed the appeal
preferred by the respondents and set aside the order dated 6 th March
2013 passed in favour of the petitioner declaring the petitioner as
protected tenant. In view of the impugned order, the declaration in
favour of the petitioner has been set aside. Hence, until and unless the
petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order, the order in
902-WP-7240.23.docx
favour of the petitioner which was passed on 6 th March 2013 will not
revive.
4. Learned counsel states that before setting aside the order under
Section70(b) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act,
1948 ("Tenancy Act") on 25th January 2022 there was already an order
passed under Section 32-O of the Tenancy Act based on the
declaration under Section 70(b). He further submits that in view of the
setting aside of the order under Section 70(b) in favour of the
petitioner, there is an application made for removal of the name of the
petitioner from the revenue record in view of the impugned order.
5. Though there are no specific pleadings in the memo of petition,
considering the oral submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, till
next date, no further action regarding revenue entries be taken on the
basis of the impugned order.
6. The aforesaid interim protection granted will remain operative till
23rd February 2024.
7. In addition to Court notice, petitioner to serve the respondents by
902-WP-7240.23.docx
private service and file service affidavit before the next date.
[GAURI GODSE, J.]
