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

Argument on Exh.____Unready

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

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 02

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

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

16-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

Civil Judge Senior Division, Karanja All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case