Case Note & Summary
The Civil Revision Application challenged the order refusing to reject the plaint in a suit filed against the Tahsildar's decision granting the applicant a right of way under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 -- The plaintiffs had initially challenged the Tahsildar's order by filing an RTS Appeal and subsequently instituted a civil suit after withdrawing the appeal -- The High Court held that the remedies of appeal and civil suit under Section 143 are alternative and mutually exclusive, and once the remedy of appeal is elected, the aggrieved party cannot subsequently challenge the Tahsildar's order through a civil suit -- The Court further held that the suit, filed beyond one year from the Tahsildar's decision, was barred by limitation under Section 143(4), the special limitation prescribed under the Code prevailing over the general provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 -- The Civil Revision Application was allowed, the impugned order was set aside and the plaint was rejected.
Headnote
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 – Section 143(3), (4) and (5) – Right of way – Alternative remedies – Doctrine of election – Appeal under Section 247 and civil suit under Section 143(4) – Remedies mutually exclusive – Plaintiffs challenged Tahsildar's order by filing RTS Appeal before Sub-Divisional Officer and subsequently instituted civil suit challenging the same Tahsildar's order – Held, once a party elects the statutory remedy of appeal, it must pursue that remedy to its logical conclusion and cannot subsequently resort to a civil suit challenging the Tahsildar's decision – Withdrawal of appeal does not revive the alternative remedy of civil suit – Suit not maintainable – Plaint liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Limitation – Section 143(4), Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 – Special law – Civil suit challenging Tahsildar's decision required to be instituted within one year from the date of such decision – Tahsildar's order dated 15.02.2023 – Suit instituted on 28.06.2024 – Clearly barred by limitation – Limitation prescribed under special statute prevails over general provisions of Limitation Act, 1963 by virtue of Section 29(2) – Sections 5 to 14 of Limitation Act cannot be invoked to extend or exclude limitation in the circumstances of the case – Trial Court's refusal to reject plaint held unsustainable – Civil Revision Application allowed and plaint rejected. Dipak Chandrabhan Gadhade/Gavande v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., Civil Revision Application No. 196 of 2025, decided on 12 February 2026 (Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench).
Issue of Consideration
The Issue of whether a civil suit challenging a Tahsildar's order under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 is maintainable after the plaintiffs had initially pursued an appeal under the same Code, and whether the suit is barred by limitation under Section 143(4) of the Code
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the Civil Revision Application and set aside the order refusing to reject the plaint -- The Court held that the remedies of appeal and civil suit available under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, are alternative and mutually exclusive, and once the plaintiffs had elected to pursue the remedy of appeal, they could not subsequently institute a civil suit challenging the Tahsildar's decision -- The Court further held that the suit was barred by the one-year limitation prescribed under Section 143(4) of the Code and that the limitation prescribed under the special statute would prevail over the general provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 -- Consequently, the plaint in Regular Civil Suit No.525 of 2024 was rejected.
Law Points
- Interpretation of Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
- 1966 regarding remedies for challenging Tahsildar's decisions
- Doctrine of election when multiple remedies are available
- Application of limitation periods under Section 143(4) of the Code and the Limitation Act
- 1963
- Distinction between remedies under sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 143
- Exclusion of time under Section 14 of the Limitation Act
- 1963 for bonafide prosecution of appeal
