( 1 ) 938-WP-10748-2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 938 WRIT PETITION NO. 10748 OF 2018 Smt Indumati Ratilal Sethia And Ors VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others ... Mr. Pratik Kailasrao Shinde, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, AGP for Respondent-State. Mr. A. V. Hon, Advocate for Respondent No. 6. Mr. A. G. Ambetkar Advocate for Respondent No. 7. CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATE : 20th AUGUST 2026. PC :- 1. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties. 2. The present petitioners claim to be the legal heirs of one Ratilal Sethiya, who purchased the agricultural land bearing Gat No.453, situated at village Palve (Kh). Tal. Parner, Dist. Ahilyanagar, from Mr. Chandrakant Kardile. Mr. Kardile had purchased the land from Respondent No.7 in an auction conducted through the bank. The land was mortgaged by respondent No.7 in favour of respondent No.6/bank. ( 2 ) 938-WP-10748-2018 It is in that auction proceeding, the land was purchased by Mr. Kardile. It is now stated that though the petitioner’s father had already purchased the land on the date of award, still the award was passed in the name of respondent No.7 i.e. consent award on 02/07/2018. 3. This Court thus finds that there are several disputed questions of fact in the present matter. The petitioner will have to strictly prove their entitlement to receive the compensation by proving their ownership over the land. As of today, the amount under consent award is reportedly lying with Respondent No.4 i.e. the Sub-Divisional Officer, Ahmednagar. 4. This Court finds that as there are disputed questions of fact, this Court need not go into that aspect. It would be appropriate to direct the parties to approach the Civil Court and to establish their respective rights. It is only thereafter it would be proper to disburse the amount to the rightful owner, after the decision of the Civil Court. 5. Considering above, we pass following order: (i) Writ petition stands disposed off. (ii) The amount be kept with Respondent no.4/Sub-Divisional Officer, Ahmednagar, or such other authorities wherever the amount is lying, till ( 3 ) 938-WP-10748-2018 the rights of the parties are finally determined. (iii) Time consumed in prosecuting this writ petition shall be excluded while calculating the period of limitation for approaching the civil court or any other competent authority, as the case may be. (iv) The amount shall not be disbursed till the rights of the parties are determined. (v) With these, writ petition stands disposed off. [JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [KISHORE C. SANT, J.] D.A.ETHAPE