1 wp5943-10.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5943 OF 2010 Ganpat P. Suryawanshi .. Petitioner versus Kisan (Krushi) Shivram Patil (since deceased) through legal heirs Maruti Kisan Patil & Ors .. Respondents Mr.P.S.Dani for the petitioner. Mr.S.K.Shinde i/by Yogesh Sankpal & Pramod Kathane for respondent No.1. Mr.N.D.Hombalkar for respondent Nos.2 to 5. Mr.R.M.Patne, A.G.P for respondent Nos.6 and 7. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 25th July 2011. P.C.: . Heard both sides. After this matter was argued for sometime and considering the observations that have been made in order dated 11th May 2010 and particularly from pages 92 to 95 of the petition paper-book, to my mind, the disputed issues could not have been resolved during the course of the proceedings in relation to insertion and deletion of the revenue entries. On this position being brought to the notice of Mr.Shinde, the learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents, he fairly states that the impugned orders dated 24th June 2008 and 11th May 2010 be quashed and 2 wp5943-10.doc set aside, but, liberty be reserved to the parties to approach a competent Civil Court and seek appropriate declarations and reliefs. If a suit is not already instituted, the contesting respondents can approach a competent Civil Court and needless, therefore, to state that subject to the final orders in the said proceedings, the authorities under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code will abide by final order in the proceedings before the Civil Court. Needless, therefore, to clarify that the position prevailing as on 24th June 2008 will continue, subject to the final orders of the civil Court. All contentions of both sides in so far as the controversy on the right, title and interest in the immovable property, are kept open. Petition is disposed off subject to above. No costs. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)