1. Rule was granted in this matter on 19th April, 2011. Except respondent no. 3, all other respondents are served. The learned AGP appears for respondent no.1. Shri Kotwal, Advocate with Shri Jain, Advocate, appears for respondent NO. 2. The learned counsels appearing for the parties submit that the respondent no. 3 though not served, is not the contesting party and hence, the decision of the matter need not wait for him.

2. The respondent no. 2 filed an application before the Tahsildar, claiming right of way over the boundaries of field Survey No. 427 and 429. The respondent no. 2 is the owner of survey No. 424, whereas the petitioners are owner of survey no. 429. The petitioners had objected to the right of way claimed by the respondent no. 2. The Tahsildar, Hinganghat treated this to be an application under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (for short MLR Code) and accordingly registered the same as Case No. 12/LND 30/2006. After enquiry, an order came to be passed on 10th August, 2006, holding that there exists a right of way for the respondent no. 2 from the boundaries of Survey No. 427 and 429. The Tahsildar passed further order directing removal of o