Quashed

Mahanandabai Punjabrao Kokre and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC18 Sept 2019WP/1235/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two connected writ petitions, the Division Bench rejected the petitioners' objection under the National Highways Act. Finding a bonafide dispute over title to ancestral lands pending before a civil court, the court quashed the impugned orders and directed the competent authority to refer the matter to the civil court for final adjudication before disbursing funds.

What did the court decide?

The objection is rejected; quashed and set aside impugned orders; dispute referred to the principal court of original civil jurisdiction; undisbursed amounts transmitted to the civil court.

Mahanandabai Punjabrao Kokre and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Partition | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1 wp 14159.18

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 14159 OF 2018

¶4

Mahanandabai Punjabrao Kokre and others .. Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶7

Shri Sunil V. Kurundkar, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri S. P. Tiwari, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri S. S. Gangakhedkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

¶8

WITH

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO. 1235 OF 2019

¶10

Mahanandabai Punjabrao Kokre and others .. Petitioners

¶11

Versus

¶12

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶13

Shri Sunil V. Kurundkar, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri S. P. Tiwari, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri S. S. Gangakhedkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

¶14

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND

¶15

ANIL S. KILOR, JJ. DATE : 18TH SEPTEMBER, 2019.

¶16

FINAL ORDER :

¶17

. The objection filed by the petitioners under Section 3-H(4)

¶18

2 wp 14159.18

¶19

of the National Highways Act is rejected in Writ Petition No. 14159 of 2018 and in another writ petition final order has not been passed by the Competent authority. The parties in both the writ petitions are same.

¶20

Mr. Kurundkar, the learned advocate for petitioners submits that, the lands acquired are ancestral properties of the petitioners and respondents. The petitioners are the daughters of the respondent No. 3 and sisters of the respondent No. 4. The petitioners have also filed suit for partition and separate possession and same is pending before the Civil Court. According to the learned counsel, as the properties are ancestral properties, the petitioners being daughters are entitled to equal share as per Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act.

¶21

Mr. Gangakhedkar, the learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 submits that, the competent authority has rightly decided the issue.

¶22

The relationship amongst the parties is not disputed. Nothing has been placed on record to substantiate that the writ properties are self acquired properties. The suit for partition and separate possession is also pending. It appears to be case of triable issue. Bonafide dispute about the title exists. In such case, the competent authority is required to refer the dispute to

¶23

3 wp 14159.18

¶24

the principal court of original civil jurisdiction.

¶25

In the light of the above, the impugned orders are quashed and set aside. The competent authority shall refer the dispute amongst the parties to the concerned principal court of original civil jurisdiction. The amount not disbursed to the parties shall be transmitted to the principal court of original civil jurisdiction and the same shall be disbursed only after the decision in the dispute. Some amount has already been withdrawn by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4. In case some amount is withdrawn by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 same shall be subject to the decision of the principal court of original civil jurisdiction.

¶26

With these observations the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶27

[ANIL S. KILOR, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]

¶28

bsb/Sept. 19

Mahanandabai Punjabrao Kokre and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahanandabai Punjabrao Kokre and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prajkta Navnath Lagad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ganesh Ramnath Khare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Surekha Vitthalrao Meghare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mohan Narayan Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ghanshyam Kisan Burhade and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Maharashtra Apang Kamgar Kalyankari Sangh through Its District Vice President Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others