Jaysing Madhavrao Pawar vs The State Thr. Collector Advocate - Musale G. K. — 342/2025
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34,38. Disposed: Contested--DECREED on 09th March 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHAH180025222025
Filing Number
670/2025
Filing Date
24-Mar-2022
Registration No
342/2025
Registration Date
28-Mar-2022
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Rahuri
Judge
12-Civil Judge Senior Division
Decision Date
09-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECREED
Last updated 13-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Jaysing Madhavrao Pawar
Adv. Aghav V. V.
-
2.Sursing Madhavrao Pawar
Adv. Aghav V. V.
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State Thr. Collector Advocate - Musale G. K.
-
2.Tehsildar, Rahuri
-
3.Circle Officer, Vambori
-
4.Ashok Gangadhar Tamnar
-
5.Valhu Gangadhar Tamnar(Legal Heir) 5.
-
6.Jaibai Valhu Tamnar 5.
-
7.Rahul Valhu Tamnar 5.
-
8.Rupali Shivaji Hodgar
-
9.Sachin Appasaheb Tamnar
-
10.Balasaheb Paraji Mane
-
11.Dipak Eknath Mane
-
12.Anil Eknath Mane
-
13.Gorakshnath Bhausaheb Mane
-
14.Sandip Savitra Mane
-
15.Ganesh Savitra Mane
-
16.Shaila Pratap Parkhe
-
17.Somnath Manjabapu Mane
-
18.Sundarabai Manjabapu Mane
-
19.Ranjana Damu Guldagad
-
20.Sakharbai Bhausaheb Mane
-
21.Samindrabai Bhagwat Mane
-
22.Kusumbai Gorakshnath Mane
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
09-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Court Decision Summary The court allowed the plaintiff's claim and set aside the tahsildar's illegal order (Case No. 18/2016), which had granted new passage rights to defendants 4-6 despite an existing prior passage route. The court held that the tahsildar's decision was unlawful because when prior access already exists, new passage cannot be created under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. The plaintiff was declared entitled to a permanent injunction preventing obstruction and awarded litigation costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
09-Mar-2026
Disposed
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
26-Feb-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
14-Feb-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
30-Jan-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
21-Jan-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
19-Jan-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
17-Jan-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
03-Jan-2026
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
23-Dec-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
11-Dec-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
03-Dec-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
19-Nov-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
12-Nov-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
11-Nov-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
10-Nov-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
30-Oct-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
16-Oct-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
14-Oct-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
13-Oct-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
09-Oct-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
07-Oct-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
06-Oct-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
03-Oct-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
25-Sep-2025
Order on T.I.View PDF
-
25-Sep-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
11-Sep-2025
Arguments
Civil Judge Senior Division
-
30-Aug-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
24-Mar-2022
Case filed
Registration No. 342/2025
Court Decision Summary The court allowed the plaintiff's claim and set aside the tahsildar's illegal order (Case No. 18/2016), which had granted new passage rights to defendants 4-6 despite an existing prior passage route. The court held that the tahsildar's decision was unlawful because when prior access already exists, new passage cannot be created under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. The plaintiff was declared entitled to a permanent injunction preventing obstruction and awarded litigation costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts