Dilwale 1 127-WP-11023 -2023.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 127 WRIT PETITION NO. 11023 OF 2023 Suved Abdul Rashid Deshmukh & Others VERSUS Sumanbai Bhagwan Patil& Another ... Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Wani Girish V. Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Mr. Patil Vinod Prakash ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 28.01.2026 PER COURT : 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 2. By the present petition, the petitioners are assailing the order dated 18.03.2021 passed by the Tahsildar, Pachora under Section 5(2) of the Mamlatdars’ Courts Act, 1906. The said order was confirmed by order dated 24.05.2022 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Pachora in Vahivat/Revision/65/2021. 3. Mr. Wani, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners were not afforded proper opportunity of hearing and that there is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. It is submitted that no notice was served upon the petitioners and, as a result, they were not present when the panchanama was carried out. It is further submitted that the panchanama was prepared behind the back of the petitioners. Learned counsel pointed out that though the Tahsildar observed that 2026:BHC-AUG:4379 Dilwale 2 127-WP-11023 -2023.odt notices were served, the petitioners were residing elsewhere and notices were issued at a place where they were not residing. He therefore submits that the matter deserves to be remitted back to the Tahsildar for fresh decision after granting due opportunity to the petitioners. 4. Per contra, Mr. Patil, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, opposed the petition by submitting that despite service of notice, the petitioners failed to participate in the proceedings. It is submitted that the petitioners deliberately remained absent when the panchanama was conducted and also before the Tahsildar. He therefore submits that both the authorities have concurrently recorded findings against the petitioners and no interference is warranted. 5. Having considered the rival submissions and upon perusal of the record, it reveals that the petitioners were not present when the panchanama was conducted and also at the time when the Tahsildar decided the proceedings. It further appears that the petitioners did not submit their reply before the Tahsildar. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the petitioners in the interest of justice. 6. In view of the above, the writ petition is partly allowed. The order dated 18.03.2021 passed by the Tahsildar, Pachora and order dated 24.05.2022 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Pachora in Vahivat/Revision/65/2021 are quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted to the Tahsildar, Pachora to decide the proceedings afresh, after Dilwale 3 127-WP-11023 -2023.odt granting due opportunity of hearing to all the parties, in accordance with law. 7. The parties shall appear before the Tahsildar, Pachora on 16.02.2026. 8. During the pendency of the proceedings before the Tahsildar, the petitioners shall not obstruct the use of the way from the southern boundary of Survey No.234. [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE