← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/4020/2018disposed off

Vilas Babaji Sawant v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS.

2023-01-20Hon'Ble Shri Justice Nitin W. Sambre,Hon'Ble Shri Justice R. N. Laddha2 pages

bipin prithiani 15-wp-4020.18.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BIPIN DHARMENDER PRITHIANI DHARMENDER PRITHIANI Date: 2023.01.24 15:08:17 +0530 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4020 OF 2018 Vilas Babaji Sawant ...

Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...

Respondents ****** None for the Petitioner.

Mr. Kamlesh Ghumre a/w Sonali Jadhav and Sanket Patil i/by Sonali Sable for the Respondent No.4.

Mr. Vivek V. Salunke for the Respondent No.5. Mr. A. R Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent-State. ****** CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE AND R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

DATE : 20th JANUARY, 2023 P.C. :- .

On 4th January, 2023, 13th January, 2023, so also today, none appeared for the petitioner.

2.

On 24th February, 2020, this Court after having perused the affidavit of the then Tahsildar, who has conducted the auction, which is subject matter of challenge in the petition, was directed to produce on record of the petition the roznama/ordersheets. 3.

Since, the matter was not listed for quite long time, on 4th January, 2023 and 13th January, 2023, adjournments were granted in favour of the respondent-Collector for reporting compliance of the

bipin prithiani 15-wp-4020.18.doc order dated 24th February, 2020.

4.

Today also, when the matter was called out for second time, none appeared for the petitioner. Learned APP along with the affidavit of the Tahsildar, Taluka Haveli, Dist. Pune, has tendered the dates of event and the steps taken in the matter of auction with entire proceedings. The said compliance is taken on record. 5.

It is informed by the counsel for the respondent no.5 that after the auction sale was conducted in his favour, he is already put into possession of the property and is enjoying the same since last more than four years.

6.

In the wake of aforesaid affidavit, having accepted the compliance placed on record by the Tahsildar, we do no see any reason, which warrants interference in the petition.

7.

Petition is accordingly dismissed.

[R. N. LADDHA, J.] [NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]