High Court
Legal Reasoning
905-wp-10898-2024.odt-1-IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD905 WRIT PETITION NO. 10898 OF 20241.Shrinivas Janakrao MoreAge : 56 years, Occu : Agriculture,R/o. Sonkhed, Tq. Loha, Dist. Nanded2.Satish S/o Amratrao BhendekarAge : 54 years, Occu: Agri. R/o Cidco,Nanded Tq. and Dist: Nanded..PetitionersVERSUS1.Kavita w/o. Rustomrao PawdeAge : 59 years, Occu : Agriculture,R/o Pawdewadi, Tq. & Dist. Nanded2. Pradip S/o Ramnivas Somani,Age: 39 years, Occu: Doctor, R/o Vasantnagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.3. Sudhakar S/o Balkishan Pande, Age: 69 years, Occu: Business, R/o Jangamwadi, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.4. Hanmant S/o Sheshrao Sakhare, Age: 69 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o Ramanand Nagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.5. Sanjay S/o Vishwanathrao Gada, Age: 46 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o Nandanvan Colony, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.6. Naresh S/o Balaji Pokalwar, Age: 37 years, Occu: Business, R/o Ganeshnagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.7. Balaji S/o Narayan Barse, Age: 53 years, Occu: Private Service, R/o Dattnagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.8. Sushila W/o Tukaram Kharbe, Age: 50 years, Occu: Household. Narwade 905-wp-10898-2024.odt-2-R/o Rahati, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.9. Keshav S/o Ashroba Rode, Age: 46 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o Yashwantnagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.10. Kashibai W/o Anilrao Barse, Age: 38 years, Occu: Householi, R/o Itwara, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.11. Sujit S/o Sakharam Kanchalwar, Age: 48 years, Occu: Business, R/o Anandnagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded12. Sanjay S/o Gangadhar Alsatwar.Age: 51 years, Occu: Business. R/o Samratnagar. Tq. & Dist. Nanded.13. Anil S/o Pralhadrao Kulgulwar,Age: 46 years, Occu: Business, R/o Yashwant Nagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.14. Anjali W/o Jayesh Majalgaonkar,Age: 47 years, Occu: Household, R/o Deepnagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.15. Padmakar S/o Prahladrao Kulgulwar,Age: 45 years, Occu: Business, R/o Yashwantnagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.16. Varsha w/o Gajanan Jadhav,Age: 34 years, Oecu: Household, R/o Kendra, Tq. Shengaon, Dist. Hingoli,17. Anita W/o Chinoda Bodhgire.Age: 50 years, Occu: Household, R/o Jangamwadi, Tq. Kandhar, Dist. Nanded18. Balaji S/o Prabhakar Dhampalwar,Age: 39 years, Occu: Business, R/o Betmogra, Tq. Mukhed, Dist. Nanded.19. Gajanan S/o Rajkumar Uttarwar,Age: 30 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o Somesh Colony, Tq. & Dist. Nanded ...RespondentsNarwade 905-wp-10898-2024.odt-3-...Mr. Parth Shinde and Mr. Kapil Morey a/w. Mr. Ganesh A. Gadhe,Advocates for the Petitioners.Mr. Avinash D. Hande, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 4, 6 to 15 &18.... CORAM :ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. DATED :25th JULY 2025ORAL JUDGMENT :- 1.Respondent nos.1 to 19 are the original plaintiffs who havefiled a suit for perpetual injunction being Regular Civil Suit No.143 of2021 against the present petitioners. The application for grant oftemporary injunction in the said suit was rejected by the learned TrialCourt. The plaintiffs’ appeal came to be allowed against which theoriginal defendants have filed the present petitioner.2.Defendant No.2 Satish S/o. Amratrao Bhendekar purchased0.81 HR land out of Gat No.92 of Village Sonkhed, Tahsil Loha,District Nanded vide registered sale deed dated 07.07.2006 from oneMeenabai Govindrao More. The boundaries of the aforesaid propertypurchased by petitioner no.2 are as under:- “East – Agricultural Land of Rangnath MoreWest - Agricultural Land of Vithal Borgaonkar,South- Sonkhed to Borgaon Road North – Agricultural land of Ganpatrao More”Narwade 905-wp-10898-2024.odt-4-3.One Ramdas More has purchased 0.81 HR land in the same GatNo.92 from Rani Govindrao More who being a minor acted throughher mother-Meenabai Govindrao More. The boundaries of thisproperty purchased vide sale deed dated 07.12.2006 are as under :- “East – Agricultural Land of Sumitrabai MoreWest - Agricultural Land of Nagnath Paijane,South- Satish BhendekarNorth – Agricultural land of Ganpatrao More”4.Respondent No.1-Kavita Rustomrao Pawde has purchased theaforesaid 0.81 HR land in Gat No.92 from one Ramdas More vide saledeed dated 25.11.2008. The four boundaries mentioned in the saledeeds are as under :- “East – Agricultural Land of Ashok, Champatrao & Rangnath MoreWest - Agricultural Land of Sumitrabai Nansaheb More,South- Sonkhed to Borgaon Road North – Agricultural land of Satish Bendekar”5.Thus, the southern boundary in the sale deed dated 07.07.2006executed by Meenabai Govindrao More in favour of petitioner No.2mentions the southern boundary as “Sonkhed to Borgaon road” andthe sale deed dated 25.11.2008 executed by Ramdas More in favourof respondent No.1 also mentions southern boundary as “Sonkhed toBorgaon road” although in the sale deed dated 07.12.2006 executedin favour of Ramdas More(vendor of respondent no.1) the southernNarwade 905-wp-10898-2024.odt-5-boundary is mentioned as land belonging to petitioner no.2.6.It appears that respondent no.1 has thereafter sold variousportions of the aforesaid land purchased by her to respondent nos.2to 19 by carving out a lay out of residential plots in the said land.Respondent nos.1 to 19 claim to be in possession of 0.81 HR landabutting the road. The petitioners also claim possession of the same0.81 HR land. In such circumstances, the respondents have filed theaforesaid civil suit for perpetual injunction inter alia praying that thepetitioners should not disturb their possession over the suit property.The petitioners opposed the said civil suit claiming ownership overthe southern portion of Gat No.92 on the basis of sale deed dated07.07.2006. Noticing that the sale deed of vendor of respondent no.1itself shows the southern boundary of the land purchased by her asland owned by petitioner no.2, the learned Trial Court has rejectedthe application for grant of temporary injunction vide order dated30.10.2022. 7.This order dated 13.10.2022 came to be assailed byrespondents/plaintiffs by filing appeal being Miscellaneous CivilAppeal No.31 of 2022. The learned Appellate Court has allowed thesaid appeal vide judgment and order dated 11.07.2024. The learnedNarwade 905-wp-10898-2024.odt-6-Appellate Court has recorded that there was some mistake inmentioning southern boundary in the sale deed executed in favour ofRamdas More (vendor of respondent no.1). The learned appellateCourt has placed reliance on documents of non-agriculturalassessment and lay out sanctioned in favour of respondent no.1 tohold that the respondents prima facie appeared to be in possession ofthe suit property.8.This judgment and order dated 11.07.2024 allowing the appealand thereby granting temporary injunction is subject matter ofchallenge in the present petition.9.It prima facie appears that since the sale deed of Ramdas More(vendor of respondent no.1) shows the southern boundary as landowned by petitioner no.2 and not the road, the land owned bypetitioner no.2 is abutting the road. However, the learned counsel forrespondent/plaintiffs states that the layout is sanctioned in the year2010 and the order of non-agricultural assessment is passed in theyear somewhere around the same time. He contends that whilecarving out a layout the lands were measured, plots were beingdemarcated and the petitioners were fully aware about thedevelopment activities that was on going on the property.Narwade
Legal Reasoning
905-wp-10898-2024.odt-7-10.He draws attention to sale deed dated 19.07.2011 executed bySumitra More in favour of Sudarshan Shinde and four others in whichthe eastern boundary of the said land sold out of same Gat No.92 isshown as land owned by respondent no.1. He draws attention to thefact that the petitioner no.1 is attesting witness to the said sale deed.He further contends that southern boundary of this land is the sameSonkhed -Borgaon Road which both parties claimed is the southernboundary of their respective land. He therefore contends that it isprima facie evident that the respondents are in possession of the suitproperty and an inadvertent error has occurred in describing theboundary in the sale deed of Ramdas More (vendor of respondentno.1).11.The learned counsel for the petitioners counters by stating thateven if it is assumed that there was some mistake in mentioningboundary in the sale deed of vendor of respondent no.1, southernboundary in the sale deed of petitioner no.2 also mentions Sonkhed-Borgaon road as a southern boundary. He contends that aninadvertent mistake cannot be committed twice over. As regards themeasurement of the lands while following the procedure for passingnon agricultural assessment order and granting lay out sanction, thelearned Counsel for the petitioner draws attention to the compilationNarwade 905-wp-10898-2024.odt-8-of documents filed by the respondents before this Court andparticularly to the application dated 15.06.2010 submitted byrespondent no.1 to the office of Taluka Inspector of Land Record,Nanded in which the names of co-owners of Gat Number andadjoining owners are not mentioned. It appears that the learned TrialCourt has granted the injunction noticing the discrepancies in theboundaries in the sale deeds without adverting to other material onrecord. Likewise, the learned First Appellate Court has also givenimportance to the order of non-agricultural assessment and lay outsanction without dealing with other attending circumstances referredabove.12.In view of the above, it will be expedient in the interest ofjustice that the matter is revisited by the learned Trial Court. Thelearned Trial Court should consider the entire material produced byboth parties on record to decide the application for grant oftemporary injunction afresh. The parties will be at liberty to fileadditional documents in this regard. Hence following order :-O R D E Ri.Writ petition is partly allowed.ii.Order dated 13.10.2022 passed by the learned CivilJudge, Junior Division at Exhibit-5 in Regular Civil Suit No.143 ofNarwade 905-wp-10898-2024.odt-9-2021 and judgment and order dated 11.07.2024 passed by thelearned District Judge-1, Kandhar in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.31of 2022 are quashed and set aside.iii.Learned Trial Court is directed to decide the applicationfor grant of temporary injunction afresh and if possible within aperiod of three weeks from the next date fixed in the matter i.e.7.08.2025. [ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.]Narwade