Dismissed¶17

Kamlabai Marotraoji Mahadule and Others v. Shobharam S/O Kisanji Gawhane (Since Dead) Thr. His Lrs. Omprakash Shobhagram Gawhane

Bombay HC3 Dec 2025WP/7570/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 Constitution of India supervisory jurisdiction; execution proceedings; Regular Darkhast No. 1 of 2016; Regular Civil Suit No. 15 of 2005; mandatory injunction; removal of encroachment and construction by bailiff; Public Works Department report; decree confirmed up to Supreme Court; no stay; judgment debtor versus decree holder; perversity; Exhibits 1 and 117; possession of disputed site ABCD; writ petition dismissed; no costs; Nagpur Bench.

What did the court decide?

In the process of execution of the decree for handing over possession of the site, the direction to remove construction on the disputed area is necessary. ¶16

Kamlabai Marotraoji Mahadule and Others Vs Shobharam… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

2025:BHC-NAG:13659

¶2

1 WP7570-25.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 7570/2025

¶5

(KAMALABAI MAAROTRAOJI MAHADULE & OTHERS VERSUS SHOBHARAM KISANJI GAWHANE (DEAD) THR. LR’s OMPRAKASH SHOBHARAM GAWHANE)

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

¶7

appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.

¶8

Shri A.S. Dhore, counsel for the petitioners.

¶9

CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.

¶10

: DECEMBER 03, 2025 .

¶11

D ATE

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶13

The petitioners’ challenge is to the common order passed below Exhibits 1 and 117 dated 14.11.2025 in Regular Darkhast no.1 of 2016 passed by the executing Court directing the bailiff to remove the construction on the disputed area in the process of execution of the decree.

¶14

The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the executing Court directing the bailiff to remove construction over the disputed area as per the report of Public Works Department and handover possession of the disputed area to the decree holder. The petitioner is the judgement debtor, who has suffered a decree passed in Regular Civil Suit no.15 of 2005. The record reveals that the decree passed by the trial Court was confirmed up to the Supreme Court and the decree holder has filed the execution proceedings vide Regular Darkhast no.1 of 2016. By the decree under execution, the petitioners-judgement debtors were directed by an order of mandatory injunction to remove encroachment from the site shown by letters ABCD in the plaint map within three months and handover possession of that portion to the plaintiff.

¶15

2 WP7570-25.odt

¶16

Undisputedly, the decree is confirmed in favour of the decree holder up to the Supreme Court and there is no stay of any nature. In the process of execution of the decree for handing over possession of the site, the direction to remove construction on the disputed area is necessary. Although the counsel for the petitioners submitted that there was no need to remove the construction, however, on perusal of the record, it is clear that there is no perversity with the directions to remove construction on the disputed area for execution of the decree for possession.

¶17

No perversity is seen with the impugned order and hence, no indulgence is warranted with the impugned order under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶18

(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)

¶19

APTE

Kamlabai Marotraoji Mahadule and Others v. Shobharam S/O Kisanji Gawhane (Since Dead) Thr. His Lrs. Omprakash Shobhagram Gawhane

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlabai Marotraoji Mahadule and Others v. Shobharam S/O Kisanji Gawhane (Since Dead) Thr. His Lrs. Omprakash Shobhagram Gawhane

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sau. Karuna Vilas Ingle vs Additional Commissioner, Amravati Divisiona, Amravati and Others

Shantanu Tejrao Bajad, Minor Thr. His Legal Guardian, Father, Tejrao Pandurang Bajad Vs Jayvantarao Ashruji Bajad and Others

Sau. Sugratabai Shivlal Farkunde Vs the Addtional Commissioner, Nagpur and Others

Sau. Ashiwini W/O. Pritimesh Mhaturkar, (Name Before Marriage, (Ku. Ashiwini D/O. Jayram Sonone) Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Commissioner, Addl. Amravati and Others

Sau. Nirali Gaurav Doshi, Thr. P.O.a., Shri Gaurav Doshi Vs Vidhan Surendra Bhartia

Imran Khan S/O. Niyaz Khan vs Anjum Khan @ Sujata W/O. Imran Khan