1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9111 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2668 of 2007 _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office } Memoranda of Coram, } Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's } orders or directions } and Registrar's orders } ___________________________}___________________________________ Mr. S.S.Thombre,Advocate for Applicant. Mr. V.D.Hon,Advocate for Respondent no.1 . ........................... [ CORAM : B.R.GAVAI, J. ] DATE : 04/12/2009. PER COURT : 1. By way of present Civil Application, the applicant is challenging the order passed by the Tahsildar dated 6/9/2008 and also prays for an order to restrain the authorities from deleting the name of applicant from 7/12 extract. 2. Admittedly, the interim relief which has been granted by this Court on 23/1/2008, has been granted after hearing learned counsel for the parties. Interim relief which has been granted, is in terms of prayer clause ‘ C ’. 3. Not only this, the order of grant of 2 relief which was challenged by the applicant in L.P.A., has also been confirmed by the appellate court. 4. By way of prayer clause ‘ C ’, , the petitioner has prayed for stay to the operation and implementation of the order dated 31/3/2007 passed by the Additional Commissioner in Review Petition No. 185 of 2004. It is thus clear that once the order dated 13/3/2007 stands stayed, the order passed by the Additional Commissioner dated 10/3/2004 shall stand restored at least during the pendency of the present petition. Vide the order dated 10/3/2004, the Additional Commissioner has up-held the orders passed by the Sub Divisional Officer and the Additional Collector, who have directed to delete the names of applicants from the 7/12 extract and directed for taking entry of the name of the petitioner. 5. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the application. However, it is needless to state that as it is a settled law that revenue entries do not pass any title to the property and an issue of title can be decided by the Civil 3 Court, the revenue authorities after decision of the Suit, which is filed by the present petitioner, shall take appropriate entries in the revenue record as per the directions of the Civil Court. 6. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner prays for the stay to the order passed by this Court. Since this Court by issuing notice in the Civil Application vide Order dated 9/9/2009, itself had declined to grant ad-interim relief and since the Civil Application is itself being dismissed, there is no question of considering the prayer made by the applicant. The prayer is, therefore, rejected. [ B.R.GAVAI ] JUDGE knp/CA9111.09