Advocates:
['SWATI DESHPANDE', '', 'INDRAYANI M KOPARKAR & MRS SWATI DESHPANDE', 'SHRI SANDEEP D PAIGUDE', '', 'SHRI G S GODBOLE', '', '', 'A', '', 'A', 'B', 'C', 'GOVERNMENT PLEADER', 'GOVT PLEADER', 'B', 'C', 'D N A FILED']

AJN

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.261 OF 2006

IN

WRIT PETITION NO.5767 OF 2006

ALONG WITH

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.262 OF 2006

IN

WRIT PETITION NO.5441 OF 2006

ALONG WITH

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.263 OF 2006

IN

WRIT PETITION NO.5440 OF 2006

1.

Smt. Alka Vasant Khomane,

residing at Pimpale Nilakh, Pimpri,

Pune.

)

)

)

2.

Smt. Anandibai Maruti Ramoshi

@ Chavan.

)

)

3.

Bharat Maruti Ramoshi @ Chavan

(since deceased, through his legal

heirs)

)

)

)

3A. Smt. Sangita Bharat Chavan

)

3B. Mast. Sachin Bharat Chavan

(since minor, through his natural

Guardian – No.(3A) above).

)

)

)

AJN

2

3C. Mast. Subhash Bharat Chavan,

(since minor, through his natural

Guardian – No.(3A) above).

)

)

)

3D. Ms. Nutan Bharat Chavan (since

minor, through his natural

Guardian – No.(3A) above).

Nos.2 and 3(A) to 3(D) residing at

Warjegaon, Taluka Haveli, Dist.

Pune.

)

)

)

)

)

)

4.

Smt. Lata Rambhau Jadhav

residing at Warje, Taluka Haveli,

District Pune.

)

) ... Appellants

Versus

1A.

State of Maharashtra through the

Secretary Revenue & Forest

Department.

)

)

)

1B. The Additional Commissioner,

Pune Division, Pune - 411 001.

)

)

1C. The Collector, Pune – 411 001.

)

1D. The Tahsildar, Haveli, District

Pune.

)

)

2.

Smt.

Patasibai

Kundanmal

Sancheti (since deceased through

her heirs).

)

)

)

2A. Surajmal Kundanmal Sancheti,

residing at House No.176, Matru

Chhayya, Kothrud, Pune – 411

029.

)

)

)

)

AJN

3

2B. Smt. Champabai Harakchand

Kolan, residing at A/1, Mahavir

Darshan Building, Alandi Devachi,

Taluka Khed, District Pune.

)

)

)

)

3.

Chandrakant

Kundanmal

Sancheti, residing at House

No.176, Matru Chhayya, Kothrud,

Pune - 411 029.

)

)

)

)

4.

Namdeo Bahiruji Lonkar, residing

at 6/4, Matru-Smriti, Near Ganpati

Temple, Kondhawa Khurd, Pune

– 411 048.

)

)

)

)

5.

Gulabchand

Govindchand

Pavecha

(since

deceased,

through his legal heirs).

)

)

)

5A. Dipchand Gulabchand Pavecha,

residing at Survey No.686, Amar-

Deep, Bibwewadi, Pune – 411

037.

)

)

)

)

6.

Popatlal Devichand Dugad,

residing at 686/21, Padmashree,

Bibwewadi, Pune – 411 037.

)

)

)

7.

Pannalal Bhivraj Nahar (since

deceased, through his legal

heirs).

)

)

7A. Ashok Pannalal Nahar, residing at

Om-Pawan, 12, Prem Nagar Co-

operative

Housing

Society

Limited, Near Pushpamangal

Karyalaya, Bibwewadi, Pune –

411 037.

)

)

)

)

)

)

AJN

4

8.

Harakchand Dhanraj Kolan (since

deceased, through his legal

heirs).

)

)

8A. Sham Harakchand Kolan.

)

8B. Sanjay Harakchand Kolan, both

Nos.8(A) and 8(B) residing at A/1,

Mahavir Darshan Building, Alandi

Devachi, Taluka Khed, District

Pune.

)

)

)

)

)

9.

M/s.

Aditya

Builders,

a

Partnership Firm through its

partners -

)

)

)

9A. Shantilal Bhikchand Katariya

)

9B. Satish Katariya

)

9C. Sachin Lodha, All Nos.9(A) to 9

(C) residing at 619, Sadashiv

Peth, Bajirao Raod, Pune – 411

030.

)

)

)

)

Ms. Indrayani M. Koparkar for the appellants.

Mr. Sandeep D. Paigude for respondent 5A.

Mr. V.V. Tulzapurkar, senior counsel i/b Mr. G.S. Godbole for

respondents 3, 4, 6, 7A, 9, 9A, 9B, 9C.

Mr. S.R. Nargolkar, A.G.P. for the State.

CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI &

SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, JJ.

DATE ON WHICH THE JUDGMENT

AJN

5

RESERVED : 12TH FEBRUARY, 2008.

DATE ON WHICH THE JUDGMENT

PRONOUNCED : 26TH FEBRUARY, 2008.

JUDGMENT : (Per Smt. Ranjana Desai, J.)

1.

In these three letters patent appeals, judgment and order

dated 12/10/2006 delivered by learned Single Judge of this court

disposing of three writ petitions is under challenge. The facts

involved in all these three letters patent appeals are the same.

They can be disposed of by a common order and, hence, this

common order.

2.

Before we deal with the rival contentions, we must note that

we were informed by learned counsel that there were settlement

talks between the appellants and the contesting respondents and

the contesting respondents had, wit