903.wp.5390.22.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO.5390 OF 2022

1.

Bhausaheb Dnyandeo Ingale

Age : 46 years, Occu: Agri.

2.

Abasaheb Dnyandeo Ingale

Age : 66 years, Occu: Agri.

3.

Raosaheb Dnyandeo Ingale

Age : 50 years, Occu: Agri.

4.

Ramchandra Rangnath Ingale

Age :75 years, Occu: Agri.

5.

Deepak Laxman Ingale

Age : 48 years, Occu: Agri.

6.

Sanjay Laxman Ingale

Age : 50 years, Occu: Agri.

R/o at post Pisorekhand,

Tq. Shrigonda,

Dist. Ahmednagar.

… PETITIONERS

(Org. respondents)

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra

through the Collector,

Ahmednagar, District - Ahmednagar

2.

The Sub-Divisional Officer,

Shrigonda-Partner Division

Dist. Ahmednagar.

3.

The Tahasildar

Tahsil Office, Shrigonda,

Tq. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar.

4.

Shashikant Sarjerao Ingale

Age : 53 years Occu: Agri.

5.

Bharat Sarjerao Ingale

Age : 48 years, Occu: Agri.

6.

Pantig Rangnath Ingale

Age : 71 years, Occu: Agri.

7.

Nitin Pantig Ingale

1/7

903.wp.5390.22.odt

Age : 49 years, Occu: Agri.

8.

Jaysing Rangnath Ingale,

Age : 66 years, Occu: Agri.

9.

Maruti Rangnath Ingale

Age : 67 years, Occu: Agri.

10. Jalindar Rangnath Ingale

Age : 56 years, Occu: Agri.

11. Anil Bajirao Ingale

Age : 51 years, Occu: Agri.

12. Shekhar Bajirao Ingale

Age : 51 years, Occu: Agri.

13. Bhaskar Jaysing Ingale

Age : 49 years, Occu: Agri.

14. Narsing Jaysing Ingale

Age : 53 years, Occu: Agri.

15. Pradeep Laxman Ingale

Age : 46 years, Occu: Agri.

16. Shakuntala Laxman Ingale

Age : 61 years, Occu: Household

17. Baban Kisan Ingale

Age : 49 years, Occu: Agri.

18. Yamunabai Sarjerao Ingale

Age : 49 years, Occu: Household

19. Vaijayanta Kalyan Pandharkar

Age : 61 years, Occu: Household

20. Chhaya Deepak Ingale

Age : 41 years, Occu: Household

21. Ashabai Sanjay Ingale

Age : 46 years, Occu: Household

22. Latabai Shivram Jagtap

Age : 68 years, Occu: Household

23. Sojabai Dnyandeo Ingale

Age : 80 years, Occu: Household

24. Balu Dnyandeo Ingale

Age : 56 years, Occu: Agri.

R/o at post Pisorekhand,

Tq. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar.

… RESPONDENTS

(Resp. Nos.4 & 5 are org. applicants)

Resp Nos.6 to 24 are added as formal

parties)

…

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. P.V. Latange

AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. S.N. Morampalle

Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 and 5 : Mr. V.D. Hon, Senior counsel i/b.

Mr. A.V. Hon

…

2/7

903.wp.5390.22.odt

CORAM

: MANGESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE

: 12.07.2022

JUDGMENT :

Heard. Rule. The Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned

AGP waives service for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Learned Senior advocate Mr.

Hon waives service for respondent Nos.4 and 5. At the joint request of the

parties, the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission.

2.

The petitioners who are some of the defendants in a suit filed

by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 under Section 5(2) of the Mamlatdars’ Courts

Act, 1906 (herein after ‘the Act’) are aggrieved by the judgment and order

passed by the Mamlatdar decreeing the suit and dismissal of their revision

preferred under Section 23(2) of that Act by the learned Sub-Divisional

Officer thereby confirming the order of the Mamlatdar.

3.

The learned advocate Mr. Latange for the petitioners would

submit that the authorities below have not borne in mind their powers and

jurisdiction under the Mamlatdar Courts Act. They have failed to take into

consideration a distinction between their powers under that Act and the

powers under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966

(herein after ‘the Code’). On respondent Nos’.4 and 5 own showing, the

right being claimed in respect of the way which is allegedly obstructed by

the petitioners and the rest of the respondents is a new way. Already there

is another way in existence which is old one for the respondent Nos.4 and 5

to reach to their land Gut No.123 which passes along northern boundary of

3/7

903.wp.5390.22.odt

land Gut Nos.66, 122 and 123. The disputed way is in fact a way created

by the petitioners and the res