Dismissed

Munab Shaha Nur Shaha and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC10 Oct 2024WP/1632/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition filing under Article 226 read with Section 482 CrPC challenging an order directing parties to approach the Civil Court due to mutation discrepancies. The Court held that the Petitioners had already filed a civil suit regarding the same subject matter, rendering the writ petition unnecessary.

What the court decided

AI extract

Munab Shaha Nur Shaha and Another Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:24801

¶2

..1.. 911-crwp-1632-24

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

911 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1632 OF 2024

¶5

MUNAB SHAHA NUR SHAHA AND ANOTHER VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Mahesh K. Bhosle APP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 : Mr. V. M. Chate

¶8

… CORAM : Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. DATE : 10.10.2024

¶9

PER COURT :

¶10

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners. Mr. V. M. Chate, learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶11

By the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Petitioners have challenged the order dated 29.07.2022 passed by the Tahsildar, Jafrabad / Respondent No.2, whereby the owners or interested persons in land survey no. 3/1 gut no.6, admeasuring 3 H. 39 R were directed to approach the Civil Court for adjudication of their right because the mutation entry no.322 has already been granted on 21.10.1977 in the names of original owner Nur Shaha Gulab Shaha and his six sons. But as per the consolidation report Nur Shaha Gulab

¶12

..2.. 911-crwp-1632-24

¶13

Shaha is not shown as a owner of the land. So also, as per partition mutation entry has been effected in the name of Munab Shaha Nur Shaha to the extent of 1 H 69 R. As per 7/12 extract, the name of Munab Shaha Nur Shaha is entered in the land admeasuring 1 H 31 R and the mutation entry in respect of 1 H. 59 R. appears in the name of Lukmanshah Nur Shaha. Therefore, it would not be possible to obstruct the Non-Applicant for cultivation of the land.

¶14

During the course of argument, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners produced a communication dated 04.10.2024 issued by Respondent No.2 – Tahsildar, Jafrabad to the Assistant Police Inspector, Police Station, Tembhurni, Taluka Jafrabad, District Jalna for providing police protection. However, the Petitioners already approached before the Civil Court by filing a Civil Suit No. 158 of 2022 in respect of the field which is subject matter of the present petition. Therefore, to my mind if the Petitioners are having any grievance about the impugned order as well as the communication dated 04.10.2024, they are having a remedy to file an appropriate application in the pending suit.

¶15

In view of the above, I do not find any reason to entertain the present petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

¶16

(Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.)

¶17

shp

Munab Shaha Nur Shaha and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Munab Shaha Nur Shaha and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rangnath Nivrutti Kolhe and Another Vs Sow Chaya W/O Rangnath Kolhe

Ritika Indusrties and Ohters Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Vijay Vishnuprasad Marda Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Rafik Banemiya Shaikh Vs Dimple Santosh Walzade and Others

Adv Rahul Baban Zaware and Other vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Arunkumar Amrutrao Bhadre Vs Usha W/O Arunkumar Bhadre and Another