Bhairavnath Kondiba Jadhav v. The Additional Commissioner Aurangabad And Others

1 17-WP-455.full.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 455 OF 2016 BHAIRAVNATH KONDIBA JADHAV

VERSUS

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, AURANGABAD AND OTHERS -- Mr.A.V.Rakh, Advocate for petitioner Mr.P.N.Kutti, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3 -- CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.

DATE : APRIL 24, 2017 PER COURT :

Though respondent no.4 is served, none appears for him. The learned AGP appears for respondent nos.1 to 3.

2.

Mr.Rakh, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Revision has been wrongly decided by the respondent/authority. The respondent/authority has failed to consider the right of the parties. He submits that even Civil Suit being R.C.S. No.629 of 2012 is pending.

2 17-WP-455.full.odt 3.

The entries in the revenue record are made for fiscal purpose. The revenue authorities would be bound by the judgment delivered by the Civil Court. As it is stated that a Civil Suit is pending between the parties, naturally, the mutation entries would also be subject to the decision of the Civil Court.

4.

With these observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

[S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] kbp