The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the Tahsildar's order for execution of a partition decree. The court held that a substantive remedy exists under the MLRC and Section 54 CPC, declining judicial review.
The writ petition is dismissed; interim relief granted earlier stands vacated.
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.
Digitally signed by VARSHA VARSHA VIJAY VIJAY RAJGURU RAJGURU Date: 2024.01.23 11:36:27 +0530
4-wp-5430-2019.doc
varsha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5430 OF 2019
Krishna Bandu Pharate Decd thru Lrs … Petitioner
vs.
Gunda Namdev Lendwe Decd thru Lrs and … Respondents Anr
Mr. Samir Arunkumar Vaidya, a/w. Mr. Prathmesh Sarang, Mr. Kaivalayan Raul for Petitioner.
Mr. Mandar Limaye for respondent nos. 1B(a) to 1B (c) and 1C and 1F.
CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 8th JANUARY, 2024
P.C. :-
Page no. 1 of 2
4-wp-5430-2019.doc
54 of the Civil Procedure Code. Since, substantive remedy under the MLRC is available to the petitioner, I decline to entertain this petition.
(GAURI GODSE, J.)
Page no. 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition regarding proceedings for execution of a partition decree.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Krishna Bandu Pharate
Gunda Namdev Lendwe
Gauri Godse
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
