ASHOK KADUBHAU SONWANE AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
WP/15292/2019 · 2026-03-27
Shri Siddheshwar Sundarrao Thombre
body2019
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2019 DAILYLAW 3311 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2019 DAILYLAW 3311 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 of 2 63-WP.15292.2019.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 63 WRIT PETITION NO. 15292 OF 2019 ASHOK KADUBHAU SONWANE AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ... Mr. V. K. Bhosale h/f. Mr. S. R. Sapkal, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. D. R. Korde, AGP for Respondent-State. Mr. Sanjay S. Dudhane h/f. Mr. Rahul R. Karpe, Advocate for Respondent No.7. Mr. Pradeep K. Palve, Advocate for Respondent No.8. Mr. Vikram R. Dhorde, Advocate for Respondent No.7. ...
CORAM :
SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE :
27th MARCH 2026 P.C.:-
1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.
2. After hearing the parties for some time, it appears that the dispute pertains to a mutation entry. It is well settled that a mutation entry is only for fiscal purposes and does not confer any right, title, or interest in the property. The question of title is to be adjudicated by the competent Civil Court.
3. Both the learned Advocates submit that, in respect of the same property, Regular Civil Suit No.1075 of 2011 is pending between the parties and is presently at the stage of evidence. Therefore, without going into the merits of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by observing that the mutation entry shall be subject to the outcome of the said civil proceeding, i.e., R.C.S. No.1075 of Tauseef 2026:BHC-AUG:14503
2 of 2 63-WP.15292.2019.odt
2011.
4. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of.
5. It is clarified that the Civil Court shall decide the suit on its own merits, without being influenced by any observations made by the revisional authority.
6. Considering that the suit is of the year 2011, both the learned Advocates submit that the purpose would be served if a direction is issued for its expeditious disposal. Accordingly, the Trial Court is directed to decide Regular Civil Suit No.1075 of 2011 within a period of one year from today.
7. The interim order granted by this Court shall continue till the disposal of the suit by the Trial Court.
(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.) Tauseef