Suryabhan Waman Gaikwad And ORS v. Madhu Lilaram Gurnani And ORS

k 1/2 25 wp 10994.24 as.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10994 OF 2024 Suryabhan Waman Gaikwad & Ors.

....Petitioners V/S Madhu Lilaram Gurnani & Ors.

....Respondents _________ Mr. V.S. Kapse i/b Mr. S.P. Shetye for the Petitioners. __________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

DATE : 04 FEBRUARY 2025.

P.C.:

1.

The Petition challenges order dated 10 January 2019 passed by Member (Administration), Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Mumbai, allowing revision application and setting aside the orders passed by the Tahasildar and Agricultural Land Tribunal as well as Sub Divisional Officer.

2.

I have heard Mr. Kapse, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and have considered the submissions canvassed by him.

3.

There appears to be no dispute to the position that the Petitioners sold the land in question in the year 2006 and received entire amount of consideration thereof. They never katkam Page No.

1 of

k 2/2 25 wp 10994.24 as.doc challenged the said sale deed. After the land passed into multiple hands, they thought of initiating proceedings under provisions of section 84C of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 in the year 2011. It appears that the land has ultimately been acquired by the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and the compensation has already been paid to the last purchaser. In such circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, in aid of Petitioners design to secure compensation after having already earned the entire amount of consideration for sale of land in the year 2006. Writ Petition is accordingly rejected.

(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) by SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM Date:

2025.02.05 14:34:57 +0530 SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM katkam Page No.

2 of