1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3095 OF 2010 (Vijaykumar Mohanlal Bagdiya vs. Jitendrakumar Purushottam Dalal & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JULY 20, 2010. Heard Shri Tathod, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and Shri Sonare, learned AGP for respondents No. 2 & 3. Shri Tathod, learned counsel contends that the way was obstructed in 1985 and, therefore, the Tahsildar granted way to Respondent No. 1. 20 years thereafter again complaint of similar obstruction was made and merely because of earlier grant, way has been again directed to be cleared. He invites attention to reply specifically filed stating that in the meanwhile, Respondent No.1 has purchased another adjacent field and hence he has got a better way to approach his field. Shri Tathod, learned counsel, contends that suit way which pass through the cultivable portion of the field and therefore damages the crop, otherwise way cannot be used and need not be used now. He contends that this subsequent event which has got material bearing has not been looked into by Respondents No. 2 2 & 3. Shri Deshpande, learned counsel and the learned AGP state that the event has got no bearing and as way was already granted, direction to clear obstruction deserves to be maintained. The way granted is under Section 5 of Mamlatdar Courts Act and not under Section 143 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. The alleged subsequent event is, therefore, not relevant under Section 5 jurisdiction. The impugned order, therefore, calls for no interference. If the petitioner has got any other remedy available under the law, he is free to take recourse to it. With this liberty, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.