Bombay High Court
UMESH ALIAS UMAJI BHASKAR NARSALE AND OTHERSversusKISAN RADHO TAMBE AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
Revenue entries must be taken in accordance with the terms of the compromise entered in the second appeal, overriding the earlier ministerial order.
Summary
The petitioners challenged an order issued by the Minister (Revenue) of Maharashtra under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, which recorded revenue entries for a suit property. While the ministerial order was pending, the parties to a second appeal concerning the ownership of the same property reached a compromise, and consent terms were entered in Second Appeal No. 579 of 1999. The petitioners argued that the revenue entries should be revised to reflect the terms of this compromise. The Court held that, in view of the compromise, the revenue authorities must take entries according to the consent terms, effectively superseding the earlier ministerial order. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with directions to the revenue authorities.
Issues considered
- Whether revenue entries made under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 can be altered to reflect a compromise decree passed in a pending second appeal concerning ownership of the suit property.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 — s. 257
Subjects
- land revenue
- Section 257
- Maharashtra
- compromise decree
- second appeal
- revenue entries
- ministerial order
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:42727
1 1-WP-12249-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 12249 OF 2025
Umesh @ Umaji Bhaskar Narsale & Ors.
Versus
Kisan Radho Tambe & Ors.
…
Mr.A. R. Sayed for the Petitioners.
Mr.A.G. Ambetkar for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
…
CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
DATE : 15.09.2026
PER COURT :
1. The Petitioners are challenging the order passed by the
Minister (Revenue), State of Maharashtra issued under Section 257 of the
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (for short ‘MLR Code, 1966’). It is
submitted that after the order has been passed by the Minister on 25 th
August, 2025, about the revenue entries the Second Appeal pending
before this Court pertaining to the ownership of the suit property has
been decided by way of compromise and consent terms are entered
between the Petitioners and Respondent Nos.1 and 2, who are the
contesting parties. The copy of the consent terms passed in Second
Appeal No.579 of 1999 is placed on record and marked as ‘X’ for
identification.
Sunny Thote
2 1-WP-12249-2025.odt
2. In view of the compromise entered between the parties in
the Second Appeal deciding the ownership of suit property, the Revenue
entries are required to be taken accordingly. Hence, the Revenue
Authorities shall take entries according to the terms of compromise
between the parties.
3. With the aforementioned directions, the Writ Petition is
disposed off.
[ MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. ]
Sunny Thote
Checking your session…