The court held that orders under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code do not conclude title rights and are subject to a civil suit. The petition was dismissed on the principle that title issues require adjudication by a civil court.
Petition dismissed under principle of subject-matter jurisdiction in civil court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3507 OF 2006
Veronica Jokim Gomes & Ors. .. Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra .. Respondents
Mr.M.M.Vaidya and P.R.Kadam for petitioners
Mr.S.R.Chinchalikar, A.G.P. for State.
CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATE : 16th June 2007.
P.C.
. Orders under challenge are passed during
the course of proceedings instituted under the
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. The orders
2
and directions do not conclude rights and issue
of title in an immovable property. They are
always subject to Civil Suit being filed before
the Competent Civil Courrt and the Court is bound
to adjudicate upon such issues on merits and in
accordance with law, uninfluenced by the
observations of the Revenue Authority. Needless
to state that it would always be open for the
petitioner to apply for interim orders in a civil
suit. Petition dismissed. No costs.
(S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Veronica Jokim Gomes & Ors.
State of Maharashtra
S.C. Dharmadhikari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court