1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3275 OF 2008. Usha Girdhar Kedar Vs. Additional Commissioner & Ors. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri S. Dhole Adv. for petitioner. Shri V. V. Bhangde Adv. for respondent No.5. Smt. A. R. Taiwade AGP for respondents 1 to 4. CORAM: J. H. BHATIA, J. DATED: 26 FEBRUARY, 2009. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner and respondent No. 5 are sisters. Their father Vishnupant Puri died on 29.12.2006 leaving behind certain immovable property. According to the petitioner her father had executed a Will on 01.04.2006 and had bequeathed certain property to her. Initially in the 2 revenue record about agricultural lands name of the petitioner was recorded on the basis of Will. However, later on Sub Divisional Officer by order dated 25.05.2007 directed that names of both the sisters be recorded as legal heirs. He also clarified that if any order will be passed by the competent Court i. e. Civil Court, Revenue Authorities would be bound by such orders. He also directed that the present petitioner and respondent No. 5 will be restrained from alienation and alteration of the disputed agricultural land till the order of the competent Court. This order is challenged in the present petition. Against this order the petitioner filed an appeal which came to be dismissed by the Additional Collector and the revision filed by her also came to be dismissed by the Additional Commissioner. Hence this petition. 3. Admittedly respondent has filed the suit 3 claiming property on the basis of inheritance wherein the petitioner has propounded the Will and claiming the property on the basis of the Will. Admittedly, the civil Court has already passed an order restraining both the parties from alienating the property claimed in the suit. Admittedly, the Will is yet to be proved. Taking into consideration the fact that the Will has been challenged and the matter is before the Civil Court the revenue authorities have passed the most appropriate order. 4. In the given circumstances, there is no substance in the petition. It is dismissed. However, it is clarified that the Civil Court shall not be influenced by any observations, which might have been made by the revenue authorities while deciding the question of mutation, at the time of disposal of the suit. JUDGE svk