Bombay High Court
SHABBIR ABBAS MITHAIWALAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH REVENUE AND FOREST DEPARTMENT
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- M S KARNIKS M MODAK
Holding
The Court held that, absent any legal impediment, the Superintendent of Land Records must enter the petitioner’s name in the revenue record within four weeks of the petitioner’s application.
Summary
The petitioner, Shabbir Abbas Mithaiwala, purchased a property by registered sale deed but the revenue records still reflected a charge on the land. The City Civil Court, by its decree dated 21 March 2025, and the accompanying consent terms confirmed that the defendants had no right, title, or interest in the property and that the charge created under the 15.1.1960 consent decree had been fully satisfied. The petitioner sought a writ directing the Superintendent of Land Records to enter his name in the revenue record. The Court observed that the petitioner may file an application with the Superintendent and, provided there is no legal impediment, the entry should be effected within four weeks of the application. Accordingly, the petition was disposed without further order.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to have his name entered in the revenue record despite the prior charge on the property
- Whether any legal impediment exists to the entry of the petitioner’s title in the land records
Subjects
- revenue record
- property charge
- consent decree
- civil suit
- land records
- entry of title
Judgment
5-wp 1269-24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1269 OF 2024
Shabbir Abbas Mithaiwala … Petitioner
Versus
State of maharashtra ... Respondents
__________________________
Mr. Kaustubh Patil a/w. Adv. Dixit Parmar for the Petitioner.
Smt. Nazia Sheikh, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State.
__________________________
CORAM : M. S. KARNIK AND
S. M. MODAK, JJ.
DATED : 8th JANUARY, 2026.
P.C. :
1. We have heard learned counsel for the Petitioner.
2. Learned AGP requested for some time. It is submitted by learned
counsel for the Petitioner that the necessary entries are not effected in the
revenue record only because there was charge on the property. The
Petitioner has purchased property by a registered sale deed. It may not be
necessary to keep the matter pending. It is submitted by the learned
counsel for the Petitioner that consequent to the decree of the City Civil
Court dated 21st March, 2025, a copy of which is placed on record, it is
seen that the matter has been settled and the suit is disposed of in terms of
Consent Terms. Paragraph No.6 of the Consent Terms records thus:-
Amk 1/2
5-wp 1269-24.doc
“6. The Plaintiffs and Defendants agree, acknowledge and confirm
that the Defendants have no right title or interest to the suit property
or any part or portion thereof and the charge created under the
Consent Decree 15.1.1960 has been fully satisfied and the decretal
amount has been paid to the said Fida Hussein Jafferji Daulta @
Daulat.”
3. It is therefore open for the Petitioner to bring all these facts
including decree of the competent Civil Court to the notice of the
Superintendent of Land Records-Respondent No.2 by way of an
application. If such an application is made and if there is no legal
impediment, the necessary action be taken for entering the name of the
Petitioner in the revenue record within a period of 4 weeks from the date
of the application.
4. With such aforesaid observations, the Petition is disposed of.
(S. M. MODAK, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.)
Amk 2/2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.