Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Smt. Vidya Karandikar and Vijay Karandikar, filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nagpur, dated 12-10-2000, which remanded the matter for fresh enquiry. The petitioners had purchased agricultural land under a registered sale deed dated 30-6-1982 and claimed a right of way through the respondents' fields (survey numbers 19/1, 20/A3, 20/B1) for movement of bullock carts and plough animals. They filed an application on 21-2-1989 before the Tahsildar under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code read with Section 5 of the Mamlatdar Courts Act, 1906. The Naib Tahsildar conducted an enquiry and passed an order on 17-6-1989 in favour of the petitioners. The respondents filed a revision before the Sub-Divisional Officer, who set aside the Naib Tahsildar's order and remanded the matter for fresh enquiry. The High Court examined the facts and found that the Naib Tahsildar had conducted a proper enquiry, including spot inspection and hearing of parties. The Sub-Divisional Officer's order for fresh enquiry was based on the ground that the Naib Tahsildar had not properly considered the evidence. However, the High Court held that the remand was unjustified as the Naib Tahsildar had already conducted a thorough enquiry. The court allowed the petition, quashed the remand order, and restored the order of the Naib Tahsildar.
Headnote
A) Right of Way - Easement - Section 143 Maharashtra Land Revenue Code r/w Section 5 Mamlatdar Courts Act, 1906 - The petitioners claimed a right of way through respondents' fields for agricultural purposes based on a registered sale deed and long use. The Naib Tahsildar conducted an enquiry and passed an order in their favour. The Sub-Divisional Officer remanded the matter for fresh enquiry. The High Court held that the remand was unjustified as the Naib Tahsildar had already conducted a proper enquiry and the order was valid. The petition was allowed and the remand order was quashed. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Sub-Divisional Officer was justified in remanding the matter for fresh enquiry when the Naib Tahsildar had already conducted a proper enquiry and passed an order under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code read with Section 5 of the Mamlatdar Courts Act, 1906.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer dated 12-10-2000, and restored the order of the Naib Tahsildar dated 17-6-1989.
Law Points
- Right of way
- Easement
- Section 143 Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
- Section 5 Mamlatdar Courts Act 1906
- Remand order
- Revenue proceedings
