Sameer Bashir Jamadar v. Abhijeet Jagannath Bidkar And ORS

9-WP-38-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.38 OF 2024 SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Sameer Bashir Jamadar

...Petitioner

V/s.

SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2025.07.25 10:40:16 +0530 Abhijeet Jagannath Bidkar and Ors.

...Respondents

***** Mr.Vikas Shivarkar:- Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr.Ganesh Misal a/w Mr.Sunil Dude i/b. Mr.Vishal Kale:- Advocates for Respondent No.1.

Mr.Nitin B. Patil:- APP for Respondent No.2-State.

*****

CORAM

:

S. M. MODAK, J.

DATE :

22nd JULY 2025 P. C. :- 1.

Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner and learned Advocate for the Respondent No.1.

2.

The Sub-Divisional Officer - Pune ("SDO") as per the order dated 9th March 2020 has ordered that the possession of the land should remain with the present Respondent No.1till further order by the Civil Court. This order was challenged by the present Petitioner by way of Revision, however, he has failed.

3.

The learned SDO has decided the dispute only after hearing the Satish Sangar 1/2

9-WP-38-2024.doc Respondent No.1. Admittedly the Petitioner has not appeared. There is a dispute about service of notice of the proceeding before the SDO. The Petitioner claims it is not served. Whereas, the Respondent No.1 says that he served. So the scope of inquiry is limited, that is to say, "about proper service or not and whether the Respondent No.1 has made out a case for passing of the impugned order." 4.

According to learned Advocate Shri.Shivarkar, recently his client is served with a notice of stopping the construction. Whereas even the Respondent No.1 wants to file compilation of documents. They are at liberty to do the same by following proper procedure. 5.

Stand over to 19th August 2025.

[S. M. MODAK, J.] Satish Sangar 2/2