Ajmera Bora Associates Throu. Mayur S Ajmera v. State Of Maharashtra Throu. Its Principal Sec Revenue Dept And ORS

HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.) IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4566 OF 2026 Ajmera Bora Associates Through Mayur S. Ajmera .. Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra Through its Principal Secretary Revenue Department and Ors.

.. Respondents ....................

 Mr. Kishor Patil a/w. Mr. Anish Kikre and Ms. Akshada Wagrale, Advocates i/by Jagdish Reddy for Petitioner.

...................

CORAM

: MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

DATE : APRIL 17, 2026 P.C.:

1.

Mentioned out of turn.

2.

Heard Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Petitioner. 3.

Mr. Patil, learned Advocate represents and espouse the cause of the Petitioner in this case. He is aggrieved with a direction in the order passed by the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records (for short 'DSLR') calling upon Petitioner to file fresh Application for bringing on record legal heirs of one of the Respondents i.e. Respondent No.4 for the purpose of mutation.

4.

Briefly stated, the facts are that the Petitioner purchased the subject property in the year 2007 by registered conveyance pursuant to name of Petitioner was mutated in the revenue record. He would

submit and apprise the Court that at the then time the names of Pattedars were also shown were not shown in the revenue record of the subject property and the said Pattedars filed proceedings unsuccessfully right upto the Supreme Court. He would also apprise the Court that recently Pattedars have filed a Civil Suit in the Trial Court where they have once again unsuccessfully in obtaining the interim relief.

5.

In that view of the matter, he would submit that the names of the Pattedars which was shown in the revenue records was sought to be deleted and therefore Petitioner made an Application to the DSLR for the same. The DSLR by considering the said Application has given fresh direction to the Petitioner to implead the legal heirs of Respondent No.4. He would submit that Respondent No.4 has himself given a statement which is recorded and seen from page No.233 that his name was wrongly recorded as Pattedar and therefore he has no right and entitlement in the subject land. He would therefore submit that instead of taking cognizance of the said statement, the requirement and direction by DSLR to file fresh Application to bring legal heirs of Respondent No.4 on record is not correctly passed. 6.

An arguable case has been made out for Mr. Patil for issuance of notice and for calling upon Respondents to clarify the above position. DSLR may be undoubtedly represented by learned

AGP.

7.

Hence, issue notice to Respondents.

8.

Humdast permitted. In addition to Court's notice, Petitioner are directed to serve the Respondent a copy of this order and Writ Petition and inform about the next date of hearing by any permissible mode of service and file appropriate affidavit of service with tangible proof thereof.

9.

Learned AGP shall take appropriate instructions and apprise the Court on the next adjourned date on which date this Court shall dispose of the Petition which shall be noted by the parties. 10.

Stand over to 05th May 2026.

H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] by HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Date: 2026.04.20 16:32:27 +0530 HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT