Review application challenging a writ order that set aside a Deputy Director of Land Records decision on consolidation mutation entries due to delay and laches. The court held the challenge concerned belated consolidation records and dismissed the review application.
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.
2024:BHC-AUG:24171
{1}
CA 10530.24 review.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10530 OF 2024
IN
REVIEW APPLICATION STAMP NO. 25814 OF 2024 WITH
REVIEW APPLICATION STAMP NO. 25814 OF 2024 IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 4898 OF 2022
GORAKH SHIVAJI DAREKAR
VERSUS
TUKARAN GUNDAPPA DAREKAR AND OTHERS.
Mr. Prasanna S. Chavan, Advocate for applicant,
Mr. A.V. Lavte, AGP for respondent/State
CORAM : S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATE : 27TH SEPTEMBER, 2024.
ORDER :-
{2} CA 10530.24 review.odt
error in the mutation entry that was carried forward in the consolidation record during the implementation of the scheme.
“5.3 In the case of Shanti Conductors (P) Ltd. (AIROnline 2019 SC 1931) (supra) , it is observed and held that scope of review under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC read with Section 114 CPC is limited and under the guise of review, the petitioner cannot be permitted to re-agitate and re-argue questions which have already been addressed and decided. It is further observed that an error which is not self-evident and has to be detected by a process of reasoning, can hardly be said to be an error apparent on the face of record justifying the court to exercise its power of review under Order 47 Rule 1 C.P.C.”
{3} CA 10530.24 review.odt
implementation of the scheme or culminating mutation entries in consolidation record. This Court, therefore, allowed the writ petition thereby setting aside impugned order on the ground of delay and laches in raising the challenge to consolidation records. In that view of the matter, there is no merit in the review application.
[S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR]
JUDGE
grt/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ order quashing consolidation entries on grounds of delay and laches was reviewable under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC as an error apparent on the face of the record.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
S. Murli Sundaram vs. Jothibai KannanRelied on¶4
AIR 2023 SC (CIVIL) 1529 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Gorakh Shivaji Darekar
Tukaran Gundappa Darekar
State of Maharashtra
S.G. Chapalgaonkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
