1 W.P.No.6511/11 UNREPORTED IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.6511 OF 2011. 1. Vasant S/o Savleram Budhwant, Age major, Occ.Agri., 2. Suresh S/o Savleram Budhwant, Age major, Occ.Service & Agri., 3. Ravindra S/o Raghunath Budhwant, Age major, Occ.Agri. & Service, 4. Adinath S/o Raghunath Budhwant, Age major, Occ.Agri., 5. Janabai Waman Budhwant, Age major, Occ.Household, All R/o Nandurvihire, Tq. Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar. All petitioners through Special Attorney General Shri Raghunath Khemaji Budhwant, Age 74 years, Occ.Agri., R/o Nandurvihire, Tq.Shevgaon, Dist.Ahmednagar. ... Petitioners. Versus 1. Sushila Namdeo Shirsath, Age major,Occ.Household, R/o Nathnagar, Pathardi, Dist.Ahmednagar. 2. The Tahsildar, Shevgaon, Dist.Ahmednagar. 2 W.P.No.6511/11 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Nagar Division, Ahmednagar. 4. The Additional Collector, Ahmednagar. 5. The Additional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik. ... Respondents. ... Mr.Shivaji T.Shelke, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.K.B.Choudhari, Addl.Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.B.A.Shinde, advocate holding for Mr. V.P.Latange, advocate for Respondent No.1. ... CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 12.09.2011. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. 2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing. 3. The Respondent No.1 had initiated proceedings for correction of mutation entries 3 W.P.No.6511/11 standing in the name of the petitioners. Eventually, the matter went before the Additional Commissioner in revision. The Additional Commissioner allowed the Revision filed by the present Respondent No.1 by setting aside the order of the Additional Collector. The said order is impugned in the present Writ Petition. 4. It is not disputed that the property Gat Nos.214/1 to 214/4 is also subject matter of dispute in a Civil proceedings. The decree is passed in the said suit, against which an appeal is subjudiced before this Court. The Additional Commissioner while passing the impugned order has observed that the copy of the plaint is not filed on record, as such is not in a position to appreciate as to whether Gat Nos. 214/1 to 214/4 was the subject matter of dispute before the Civil Court. 5. It is a trite law that findings of Civil Court are binding upon the revenue authorities. However, it appears that the total record was not before the Additional 4 W.P.No.6511/11 Commissioner, so as to come to a definite conclusion. The copy of the plaint is produced before this Court. It would be appropriate to direct the parties to produce the relevant record before the authority deciding the revision, so as to appreciate the said facts before him. 6. In light of the above, the impugned order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nashik, dated 27.5.2011 is quashed and set aside and parties are relegated to appear before the Additional Commissioner, Nashik. The Additional Commissioner, shall give an opportunity to the parties to produce the relevant documents on record and shall decide the said Revision afresh. 7. Rule made absolute accordingly. No costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) asp/office/wp6511.11 5 W.P.No.6511/11