SHIAVJI GANPATI KALE Katneshwarkar P.R. vs DHONDIRAM NAMA DIKLE — WP/2394/2021
Case under Constitution of India Section 227. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 04th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030042952021
Next Hearing
05th February 2021
Filing Number
WP/3545/2021
Filing Date
30-01-2021
Registration No
WP/2394/2021
Registration Date
04-02-2021
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE
Bench Type
Single
Category
LAND LAWS AND AGRICULTURAL TENANCIES ( 21 )
Sub-Category
AGRICULTURAL LAND CEILING ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
04th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SHIAVJI GANPATI KALE Katneshwarkar P.R.
Respondent(s)
DHONDIRAM NAMA DIKLE
Adv. ,UNDRE VIKRAM SHIVAJI 1123
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE
PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH - CIVIL SIDE MATTERS
DUE ADMISSION CIVIL
URGENT ORDERS (CIVIL)
DUE ADMISSION CIVIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-02-2021 | PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH - CIVIL SIDE MATTERS |
| 04-05-2026 | DUE ADMISSION CIVIL |
| 27-04-2026 | URGENT ORDERS (CIVIL) |
| 20-04-2026 | |
| 09-09-2024 | DUE ADMISSION CIVIL |
Orders
Case Summary: WP/2394/2021 Shiavji Ganpati Kale v. Dhondiram Nama Dikle The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad) dismissed the petitioner's writ petition challenging land ownership. The court upheld the respondent's claim to 7 acres 20 gunthas of agricultural land, finding that a 1961 registered sale deed validly transferred portions to both parties and the petitioner's 1962 tenancy surrender was accepted. Since the transaction remained unchallenged for nearly 50 years with revenue recognition, the court ruled the ownership cannot be questioned after such an inordinate delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: WP/2394/2021 Shiavji Ganpati Kale v. Dhondiram Nama Dikle The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad) dismissed the petitioner's writ petition challenging land ownership. The court upheld the respondent's claim to 7 acres 20 gunthas of agricultural land, finding that a 1961 registered sale deed validly transferred portions to both parties and the petitioner's 1962 tenancy surrender was accepted. Since the transaction remained unchallenged for nearly 50 years with revenue recognition, the court ruled the ownership cannot be questioned after such an inordinate delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts