44.wp3698.2025jud.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3698 OF 2025 1 Harishchandra s/o Bhaurao Khurpade, aged 65 years, occupation agriculture. 2 Surendra s/o Bhaurao Khurpade, aged 62 years, occupation agriculture. 3 Jyoti Ravindra Khurpade, aged 40 years, occupation agriculture. 4 Akshay Ravindra Khurpade, aged 24 years, occupation agriculture. 5 Punam Ravindra Khurpade, aged 22 years, occupation agriculture. Nos. 1 to 5 resident of Virul Ronge, Tahsil Dhamangaon Rly, District Amravati. 6 Sou. Pratibha Sanjay Soetkar, aged 55 years, occupation household, resident of Anjansingi, Tahsil Dhamangaon Railway, District Amravati. ... Petitioners Versus 1 Sudhakar Krushnarao Gohatre, aged 50 years, occupation agriculture, Resident of Virul Ronge, Tahsil Dhamangaon, Rly, District Amravati. 2 Shaligram Avdhut Damble, aged 62 years, resident of agriculture, Resident of Virul Ronge, Tahsil Dhamangaon, Rly, District Amravati. 3 Pushpa Pradiprao Damble, aged 50 years, occupation household, Resident of Virul Ronge, Tahsil Dhamangaon, Rly, District Amravati. 4 Shankar Maroti Chaudhari, aged 60 years, occupation agriculture, resident of Station Fail, Pulgaon, Tahsil Deoli, District Wardha. ... Respondents PAGE 1 OF 5 2026:BHC-NAG:13432 44.wp3698.2025jud.odt 5 Uttam Vishnuji Chaudhari, aged 70 years, occupation agriculture, Resident of Virul Ronge, Tahsil Dhamangaon, Rly, District Amravati. 6 Baliram Chindhuji Chaudhari, aged 69 years, occupation agriculture, Resident of Virul Ronge, Tahsil Dhamangaon, Rly, District Amravati. 7 Dwarkabai Krushnarao Gohatre, aged 65 years, occupation household, Resident of Virul Ronge, Tahsil Dhamangaon, Rly, District Amravati. 8 Chhaya Nandu Neware, aged 50 years, occupation household, resident of Dahegaon Rly, Tahsil Deoli, District Wardha. 9 Naib Tahsildar, Dhamangaon Rly, District Amravati. 10 Sub Divisional Officer, Chandur Railway, District Amravati. Mr. Sachin S. Deshpande, Advocate for petitioners. Mrs. Mrunal Naik, AGP for respondent Nos.9 &10/State. Mr. D.P. Dapurkar, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4. CORAM : NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 05.10.2026 JUDGMENT: Heard. (2) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties. (3) The present petition challenges the order of the PAGE 2 OF 5 44.wp3698.2025jud.odt Tahsildar i.e. respondent No.9 in Proceeding No.,e-lh-,-&5@fo:G jkasÄ&12@2021&22 which has been confirmed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chandur Railway, in Revision Case No.MCA-05/Virul Ronge/11/2023- 24 dated 28.06.2025. Without adverting to the rival contentions, it would be advisable to refer to a judgment of this Court reported in 2019 SCC OnLine Bom. 18, Sudhir Yashwant Dhangade Vs. Ankush Kashiram Bole and ors. (4) In the said judgment and more particularly, in paragraphs 9 and 10 thereof, the scheme of the Mamlatdar Courts Act, has elaborated discussed. This Court has held that statutory obligations is casted on the authority to follow the mandate of the Mamlatdar Courts Act, inasmuch as granting opportunity to the parties to lead evidence and further, granting opportunity to adversary to cross examine. (5) By perusal of the impugned order, it seems that such an exercise is not done. In that view of the matter, the following order is passed. (6) The writ petition is allowed. PAGE 3 OF 5 44.wp3698.2025jud.odt (7) The order passed by the Tahsildar in Proceeding No.,e-lh-,-&5@fo:G jkasÄ&12@2021&2 as confirmed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is relegated to the Tahsildar for granting opportunity to the parties to lead evidence and also follow all other procedural aspects in the Mamlatdar Courts Act and thereafter, pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. (8) Needless to mention that this Court has not commented upon the merits of the matter and it should be for the Tahsildar to decide it in accordance with the provisions of the Mamlatdar Courts Act. Furthermore to add that the pendency of the Civil Suit and the order passed therein will also be considered by the Tahsildar while adjudicating the said application. (9) With these directions, the petition is allowed and disposed of. (10) It is also brought to my notice that a possession receipt has been executed on 08.07.2026, wherein possession has been delivered to the persons as mentioned in a notice subject to the result of the civil suit pending between the parties. Let the said order be PAGE 4 OF 5 44.wp3698.2025jud.odt continued for a further period of four weeks from today. It would be open for the parties to seek extension of the said interim order before the Tahsildar, to whom the matter is relegated, after the expiry of the four weeks period. (11) The parties have agreed to appear before the Tahsildar on 13.10.2026, without any formal notice in that regard. [Nandesh S. Deshpande, J.] Prity PAGE 5 OF 5 Signed by: Mrs. Prity Gabhane Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 08/10/2026 14:43:55