Dismissed

Rajendra Mallu Jilkar v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Mar 2019WP/1979/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted leave to the petitioner to submit documents to the Joint District Registrar for reconstructing a lost settlement deed claimed to have been registered in 1963. The Registry is directed to verify and attempt completion within four months.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to submit documents for reconstruction; Registry directed to complete formalities within four months.

Rajendra Mallu Jilkar Vs State of Maharashtra — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

wp.1979.18.10.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 1979 OF 2018

¶4

Rajendra Mallu Jilkar ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶5

Mr. Piyush Navinchandra Shah for the Petitioner

¶6

Mr. Manish Upadhye, A.G.P for the Respondent-State

¶7

CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ. MONDAY. 4Th MARCH 2019

¶8

P.C. :

¶9

1 We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶10

learned A.G.P.

¶11

2 Petitioner states that a Settlement by deceased-father in favour of petitioner and his sister was tendered for registration in 1963 and necessary proof thereof is available. The document was also registered and its details are incorporated in Index-2 Register.

1/3

SQ Pathan

wp.1979.18.10.doc

3 Petitioner also states that they have leased out property

¶16

way back in 1963 and the lessees are paying rent to them. Necessary entries in this respect are available in Municipal records.

¶17

4 Our attention is also invited to proceedings of this Court

¶18

in Miscellaneous Trust Petition No. 22 of 1963. Petitioners state that original certified copy of that order is available with them.

¶19

5 Learned A.G.P, upon instructions, states that as the Deed

¶20

of Settlement, which is claimed to be submitted for registration way back in 1963 could not be traced out by the office of respondent, the only alternative is to reconstruct the record.

¶21

6 According to him, if all above documents are furnished to

¶22

the Office of Joint District Registrar, that Office would verify the position and initiate proceedings for reconstructing the lost document, if any.

2/3

SQ Pathan

wp.1979.18.10.doc

7 In view of the document which is filed as Exhibit `A' with

¶27

this petition, it appears that certified copy is issued by this Court sometime in April 2017.

¶28

8 We are, therefore, willing to grant petitioner leave to submit all relevant documents to respondent. If such documents are supplied to that office within three weeks from today with request to reconstruct, that Office shall proceed further in the matter in accordance with law and attempt to complete formalities within further period of four months.

¶29

9 With these directions and keeping all contentions open,

¶30

we dispose of petition.

¶31

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

¶32

3/3

¶33

SQ Pathan

Rajendra Mallu Jilkar v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Mallu Jilkar v. State of Maharashtra

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

Sarfaraz Shaikh and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Paresh Waman Gaikwad and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Anirban Shovan Basu and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Evelyn Pacifico Gonsalves Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sanjeevi Rajagopal and Anr. Vs Dhanush Murthy and Anr.

S. Ramesh Kumar Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.