Disposed

M/S. Sai Sane Developers v. Kishor Subhash Gholap and Ors.

Bombay HC2 Apr 2024WP/712/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition challenged a Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal revision order allowing revision and remitting tenancy matters to the A.L.T. without reasons. The High Court held an unreasoned order unsustainable, set it aside, restored Revision Application No.P/X/8/2017 to the Tribunal for fresh decision within six months, and quashed consequential orders.

What the court decided

AI extract

M/S. Sai Sane Developers vs Kishor Subhash Gholap and Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

52-WP-712-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 712 OF 2024

¶5

M/s. Sai Sane Developers …. Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Kishor Subhash Gholap and Ors. …. Respondents

¶8

Digitally signed SHANTANU by SHANTANUSHANKARSA SHANKARSA DHUDUM DHUDUM Date: 2024.09.25 14:38:43 +0530

¶9

Adv. Ravi Kadam, for the Petitioner. Adv. Sudhir Sadavarte, for Respondent No.1.

¶10

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.

¶11

DATE : 24^th SEPTEMBER, 2024.

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

The short point is involved in this Petition is as to whether

¶14

the impugned order can sustained, since it is unseasoned order.

¶15

The order impugned reads thus:-

¶16

ORDER

¶17

“Adv. B. B. Bhargude present for applicant in case No.P/VIII/4/2017 & P/X/8/2017. Nobody present for respondent. Revision allowed. S.D.O. order No. Ten/Apeal/1/2014, dated 24/07/2017 and order

¶18

Shantanu Dhudum 1/2

¶19

52-WP-712-2024.doc

¶20

of A.L.T. in TNC Case No.32G/SR/18/2024, dated 24/03/2005 both set aside. Remitted back to A.L.T. Haveli for fresh enquiry in the light of observations made in judgment.”

¶21

In order to ascertain, this is operative part of the order the

¶22

order by itself, the direction was given to place on record any such detailed order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Bench at Pune. No such order is shown to have been passed indicating reasons for allowing the Revision Application. The order impugned being not supported by any reason cannot sustained.

¶23

As a result of this, the impugned order is set aside. The proceedings bearing Revision Application No.P/X/8/2017, are relegated back to the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal for decision a fresh. Any order passed by the Authority on the basis of order impugned shall not sustain and such orders too stand set aside.

¶24

The Revenue Tribunal to decide this Revision within a period of six months.

¶25

In view of above, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶26

( R. M. JOSHI, J.)

¶27

Shantanu Dhudum 2/2

M/S. Sai Sane Developers v. Kishor Subhash Gholap and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M/S. Sai Sane Developers v. Kishor Subhash Gholap and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mahesh Ganpat Sapkal vs State of Maharashtra Thr. the Divisional Joint Registar Co. Op. Soceity Kolhapur Division and Ors.

Shri Iqbal Siddique Patel and Anr. vs Siddique Ibrahim Patel

Dilip Subash Giriba and Others vs Osmanabad Janta Sahakari Bank through Its Branch Manager

Maharashtra State Transport Corporation Thr. Divisional Controller vs Smt. Swati Sanjay Valanju and Ors.

Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd. vs Vishnu Tirthdas Tharaney and Anr.

Shri. Rakesh Gulabrao Shinde and Ors. vs Shri Kiran Kishor Kurhade and Ors.