Bombay High Court

RUKHMINIBAI VISHWANATH DUDHATEversusPIRAJI DIGAMBAR DUDHATE AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: S G CHAPALGAONKAR

Holding

The District Judge correctly held that the trial court erred in granting a temporary injunction and that there was no jurisdictional error in setting aside that injunction.

Summary

The petitioner, Rukhminibai Vishwanath Dudhate, filed a regular civil suit seeking to quash an order granting a way through Gut Nos. 309 and 310 and to obtain a permanent injunction against any road from her land in Gut No. 316. The Sub‑Divisional Officer (SDO) later remanded the matter to the Tahsildar under Section 5 of the Mamlatdar’s Courts Act and allowed a temporary access way, while the trial court had earlier restrained the Tahsildar from executing the SDO’s order. The respondents appealed, and the District Judge set aside the trial court’s injunction, finding that the balance of convenience favored the respondents and that the petitioner would not suffer irreparable loss. The petitioner challenged this decision by filing a writ petition, arguing that the SDO lacked jurisdiction and that natural justice was violated. The High Court, after reviewing the findings, held that the trial court’s grant of a temporary injunction was not in accordance with law and that there was no jurisdictional error in the District Judge’s order, thereby rejecting the writ petition.

Issues considered

The trial court’s jurisdiction to grant a temporary injunction in the land dispute
Whether the Sub‑Divisional Officer had authority to pass the interim order under Section 5 of the Mamlatdar’s Courts Act
Whether the principles of natural justice were violated in the SDO’s order
The appropriate balance of convenience between the parties

Legislation cited

Mamlatdar’s Courts Act — s. 5

Subjects

temporary injunction
jurisdiction
Mamlatdar’s Courts Act
balance of convenience
land access
civil suit
writ petition

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:12539
                                           (1)                      915-wp-2295-2026.odt



                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              WRIT PETITION NO. 2295 OF 2026

                          RUKHMINIBAI VISHWANATH DUDHATE
                                           VERSUS
                         PIRAJI DIGAMBAR DUDHATE AND OTHERS
                                              ...
               Mr. Akash D. Gade, Advocate for the Petitioner.
               Mr. S. N. Kendre, AGP for Respondents-State.
               Mr. V. B. Kulkarni i/by Mr. Shantanu A. Deshpande, Advocate for
               Respondent No.7.
                                              ...
                                       CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
                                       DATED : 18th MARCH, 2026.
               P.C.:-

               1.     The present Writ Petition takes exception to order dated

               10.02.2026 passed by District Judge, Parbhani in Miscellaneous

               Civil Appeal No.40/2025, whereby order dated 08.08.2025 passed

               below Exhibit-5 by Civil Judge Senior Division, Parbhani in

               Regular Civil Suit No.185/2025 has been quashed and set aside.


               2.     The petitioner is plaintiffs in Regular Civil Suit No.185/2025.

               The plaintiff instituted said suit seeking relief that order dated

               09.06.2025 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Gangakhed in File

               No.2025/ROR/A/CR-469, thereby granting way passing through

               Gut Nos.309 and 310 be quashed and set aside. The petitioner has

               also prayed to grant relief of permanent injunction from creating

               any road from his land situated in Gut No.316 to approach Gut

               Nos.309 and 310.
                           (2)                     915-wp-2295-2026.odt



3.    The record indicates that Sub Divisional Officer, Gangakhed

passed order dated 13.06.2025, thereby setting aside order dated

06.01.2025 passed by Tahsildar and remanded matter back for his

consideration under Section 5 of Mamlatdar’s Courts Act.                  By

clause no.4, he directed that till Tahsildar completes enquiry and

passes final order, he shall grant way from bandh of Gut Nos.308

and 316 to approach land in Gut Nos.309 and 310.


4.    The Trial Court allowed petitioner’s application filed below

Exhibit-5 in suit and restricted defendant no.3 i.e. Tahsildar from

executing order dated 09.06.2025 passed by Sub Divisional Officer

till disposal of suit. The respondents preferred Miscellaneous Civil

Appeal before District Judge, which came to be allowed, thereby

setting aside injunction order.


5.    After hearing all concerned, Sub Divisional Officer remanded

matter back to Tahsildar for detail enquiry in terms of Section 5 of

Mamlatdar’s Courts Act and only by way of interim arrangement

directed that access way be given to respondents to approach their

land Gut No.309 and 310 from bandh of Gut Nos.308 and 316. It is

not case that learned Sub Divisional Officer had no jurisdiction to

pass any order or order is passed in violation of principles of

natural justice. Even otherwise, order is in nature of temporary

arrangement and subject to final decision to be taken by Tahsildar

in proceeding under Section 5 of Mamlatdar’s Courts Act.             The
                           (3)                     915-wp-2295-2026.odt



District Judge has considered all relevant aspects of matter and

found that exercise of jurisdiction by Trial Court was not in

conformity with factual matrix and law governing grant of

temporary injunction. The District Judge found that balance of

convenience lies in favour of respondents, whereas petitioner would

not suffer any irreparable loss.


6.      In result, no jurisdictional error can be found in impugned

order. Hence, Writ Petition stands rejected.



                                     (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
                                              JUDGE
Devendra/March-2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…