Mohd.Imran Mo.Shafi Punjani vs State Of Maharashtra Through its Collector — 118/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 02. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHWS110010382025
Next Hearing
18th June 2026
Filing Number
944/2025
Filing Date
04-03-2021
Registration No
118/2025
Registration Date
04-03-2021
Court
Civil Judge Senior Division, Karanja
Judge
1-Civil Judge Senior Division
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Mohd.Imran Mo.Shafi Punjani
Adv. S.Y.Kashid
Respondent(s)
State Of Maharashtra Through its Collector
Tahsildar, Karanja lad
Adv. GANGAWANE GOVARDHAN DNYANDEO
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Senior Division
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 15-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 30-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 25-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 16-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
CASE SUMMARY: 118/2025 The court rejected the state's application seeking dismissal of the plaintiff's suit. Mohd. Imran Punjani filed a declaration and injunction suit challenging a Tahsildar order from November 2020 that imposed a fine of Rs. 9,58,392 for unauthorized conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural use. The court found the suit maintainable, holding that civil courts have jurisdiction to examine whether revenue officers exceeded their authority or violated natural justice principles, even when statutory remedies exist, and that the plaintiff's claims are not barred under the Bombay Revenue Jurisdiction Act or Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
CASE SUMMARY: 118/2025 The court rejected the state's application seeking dismissal of the plaintiff's suit. Mohd. Imran Punjani filed a declaration and injunction suit challenging a Tahsildar order from November 2020 that imposed a fine of Rs. 9,58,392 for unauthorized conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural use. The court found the suit maintainable, holding that civil courts have jurisdiction to examine whether revenue officers exceeded their authority or violated natural justice principles, even when statutory remedies exist, and that the plaintiff's claims are not barred under the Bombay Revenue Jurisdiction Act or Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts