( 1 ) 934-CA-3813-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 934 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3813 OF 2026 IN WP-13676-2024 Mohan Kishan Ahir And Ors VERSUS The Deputy Director Of Land Record And Others WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 13676 OF 2024 Mohan Kishan Ahir And Another VERSUS The Deputy Director Of Land Record And Others ….. Mr. Gangakhedkar Shailendra S, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. R. Bagul, Advocate for Respondent No.4. ….. CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR. DATE : SEPTEMBER 1, 2026. PC :- 1. Mr. Gangakhedkar, learned advocate for the applicant, submits that during the pendency of this writ petition, the appeal pending before the respondent No.2 – The District Superintendent of Land Record, Nanded, came to be allowed on 29 January 2026. Vide the present Civil Application, he seeks to bring these developments of facts on record. Kiran Kawre ( 2 ) 934-CA-3813-2026 2. Since the writ petition was filed challenging the order condoning the delay of about 17 years caused in filing the appeal, the subsequent development is required to be brought on record. 3. In view of this, the Civil Application stands allowed. 4. The petitioner is permitted to amend the title clause. The petitioner is also permitted to amend the pleadings and the prayer clauses as mentioned at page Nos.6 and 7 of the application. 5. Apparently, the mutation entry standing in the name of the petitioner is of the year 1977. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner has constructed a residential house over the concerned property by seeking permission from the local body, and his name has been standing in the mutation record for a long period. 6. The respondent disputes the title of the petitioner over the said property. It is submitted that the mutation entries are only for fiscal purposes and that the civil rights needs to be crystallized by an appropriate Civil Court. 7. Considering the objections of the respondents, it is evident that the respondents have an objection to the ownership of the petitioner over the subject matter of property. Kiran Kawre ( 3 ) 934-CA-3813-2026 8. In view of the law laid down by this Court in Shrikant R. Sankanwar & Ors. Vs. Krishna Balu Naukudkar1 and Meena A. Rizvi Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors2., prima faice, it appears that the controversy between the parties, as raised by the respondents, would not reach its logical end unless the respondents adopt appropriate civil proceedings to establish the civil rights of the parties. 9. In view of this, until further orders, execution and operation of the order dated 29 January 2026 passed by respondent No.2 - The District Superintendent of Land Record, Nanded, in the appeal stands stayed. [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] 1 2003(2)MHLJ276 2 2026 SCC OnLine BOM 818 Kiran Kawre