Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6193 (BOM)

BABASAHEB PIRAJI ARGADE v. KHUSHALSING PARDESHI

CP/443/2026 · 2026-08-29

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

(1) 920cp443.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 920 CONT. PETITION NO. 443 OF 2026 IN WP/7833/2024 Babasaheb Piraji Argade ….Petitioner VERSUS Khushalsing Pardeshi …..Respondent Mr. A. D. Khedkar, Advocate h/f Mr. V. K. Bhosle, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. S. K. Shirse, AGP for the Respondents /State CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. DATE : 29th AUGUST, 2026 PER COURT : 1. The present contempt Petition is filed alleging that Respondent Nos. 1- Additional Commissioner and Respondent No. 2- Additional Collector have committed contempt of interim order dated 29-07-2024 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 7833/2024. The said writ Petition was filed by one Ajay Gandhi & Others in order to challenge the award dated 09-12-2023 passed by National Lok-Adalat in RCA No. 5/2016. One Surekha filed a suit for partition and separate possession being RCS No.544/2011. Said suit was decreed on the basis of compromise on 30-07-2015. Said compromise decree dated 30-07-2015 was challenged by present Petitioner Babasaheb by filing 1 of 5 2026:BHC-AUG:39778 (2) 920cp443.26 the Appeal being RCA No.5/2016. Said Appeal came to be disposed of vide award dated 09-12-2023 passed by the National Lok-Adalat on the basis of settlement pursis filed by the parties. The contention of the Petitioner is that said settlement pursis was outcome of collusion and therefore, was not binding on the Petitioner. The Petitioner accordingly challenged the award dated 09-12-2023 before this Court in writ Petition No.7833/2024. This Court passed the interim order dated 29-07-2024 in the said Petition granting stay to the award dated 09-12-2023 passed by the National Lok-Adalat. One Janardhan had filed the proceeding before the learned SDO in order to challenge the mutation entry Nos. 1284, 1291, 1292, 1299, 1391 & 1493. Said entries are pertaining to property forming subject matter of the aforesaid civil suit and Appeal. It is the contention of the Petitioner that said Appeal was allowed vide order dated 13-12-2024. It is the case of the Petitioner that said Appeal could not have been allowed in view of order dated 29-07-2024 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 7833/2024. The Petitioner-Ajay Gandhi & others have filed contempt Petition No.73/2025 with respect to said order passed by learned SDO allowing the Appeal placing reliance on award dated 09- 12-2023 passed by the National Lok-Adalat. 2 of 5 (3) 920cp443.26 2. Order dated 13-12-2024 passed by the learned SDO came to be challenged by one Anil by filing the Appeal before the learned Additional Collector/respondent No. 2. Said Appeal came to be allowed vide order dated 31-12-2025. Revision Application preferred by Janardhan challenging the said order dated 31-12-2025 is rejected by Respondent No.1-Additional Commissioner vide order dated 20-01-2026. The contention of the present Petitioner is that in view of the interim order dated 29-07-2024 passed in Writ Petition No.7833/2024, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 ought not to have entertained the Revision and the Appeal respectively. It is therefore alleged that by entertaining the revision and Appeal, Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 have committed contempt of this Court by disregarding interim order dated 29-07-2024 passed in writ Petition No.7833/2024. 3. Perusal of the said order passed by the learned Additional Collector reveals that he has recorded that RCS No. 544/2011 was disposed of on the basis of compromise and based on the said compromise decree, mutation entry No. 1284 was recorded in the revenue record. The learned Additional Collector has thereafter considered the award dated 09-12-2023 passed by the National Lok- Adalat in RCA No. 5/2015. After having the noticed the said award passed by the National Lok-Adalat reference is made to interim order 3 of 5 (4) 920cp443.26 dated 29-07-2024 passed by this Court in writ Petition No. 7833/2024 whereby the said award dated 09-12-2023 was stayed. In view of stay to the award passed by the National Lok-Adalat in Appeal, the learned Additional Collector has drawn an inference that earlier compromise decree in RCS No. 544/2011 should revive. 4. This Court while entertaining the contempt Petition is not required to consider as to whether said inference drawn is correct or incorrect. This Court is required to assess to as to whether the order passed by the learned Additional Collector amounts to disregarding the order dated 29-07-2024 passed by this Court. In the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Additional Collector has not directed to take any mutation entry on the basis of award dated 09-12-2023 passed by the National Lok-Adalat which is stayed vide interim order dated 29-07-2024 passed by this Court. Therefore, it cannot be said that the learned Additional Collector has committed the contempt of this Court while allowing the Appeal vide order dated 31-12-2025. In fact, the learned Additional Collector has quashed and set aside the order dated 13-12-2024 passed by the learned SDO, which itself is passed contrary to the interim order dated 29-07-2024 by this Court. Therefore, it cannot be said that by allowing the Appeal vide order dated 31-12-2025 the learned Additional Collector has committed 4 of 5 (5) 920cp443.26 contempt with respect to interim order dated 29-07-2024. Respondent No.1 -Additional Commissioner has confirmed the order passed by the learned Additional Collector by recording similar findings. 5. In the considered opinion of this Court no case of disobedience of the interim order dated 29-07-2024 passed by this Court in writ Petition No. 7833/2024 is made out. Contempt Petition is therefore, dismissed. 6. It is again clarified that this Court is not dealing with the correctness or otherwise of the order passed by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. This Court has restricted to its findings of allegations of the orders passed by both the authorities in the contempt of aforesaid interim order dated 29-07-2024. 7. The observations in paragraph 4 of the order with respect to order passed by the learend SDO are made for the limited purpose of deciding the present Petition. [ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. ] VishalK/920cp443.26 5 of 5