Logo

Bombay High Court Rejects Claim Over Tribal Land, Holds Notarised 99-Year Lease Devoid of Evidentiary Value

Zaved Khan

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition over a land dispute, holding that the alleged 99-year lease lacked evidentiary value and upholding the revenue authorities' orders while also dismissing the pending revision application. - Suka Mahadu Khade & Ors. v. Bababai Tukaram Shevre & Ors.

Advertisement
Bombay High Court Rejects Claim Over Tribal Land, Holds Notarised 99-Year Lease Devoid of Evidentiary Value
Join Telegram

The Bombay High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging orders passed by revenue authorities concerning a land dispute in Nashik, holding that the petitioners failed to establish any legal right over the property. The Court upheld the order of the Additional Divisional Commissioner and directed its implementation within four weeks.

Background of the Case

The petition was filed by Suka Mahadu Khade and three others against Bababai Tukaram Shevre and others. The petitioners claimed that they had entered into a 99-year lease agreement dated November 13, 1997, in respect of the disputed property for a consideration of ₹90,000 and had remained in lawful and continuous possession of the land. They challenged the Additional Divisional Commissioner's order dated October 27, 2025, the Circle Officer's possession order dated June 9, 2026, and also sought a direction for expeditious disposal of their revision application before the State Revenue Minister.

Advertisement

A Division Bench of Justice A.S. Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata found no merit in the petition.

The bench observed,

Take CourtBook Everywhere

Access your account on the go with our mobile app.

Get it on Google PlayDownload on the App Store
CourtBook Mobile App
"The entire transaction appears to be a sham."

It held that the alleged lease agreement was merely a notarized document with no evidentiary value. The Court further noted that although the petitioners claimed to have paid ₹90,000, they failed to produce any receipt or other evidence proving payment or establishing their rights over the property.

The Court also agreed with the finding that the land belonged to Respondent No. 1, an Adivasi, and that any transfer without the requisite statutory permission was impermissible.

The High Court dismissed the writ petition and, in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution, also dismissed the revision application pending before the Revenue Minister to prevent further litigation. It upheld the Additional Divisional Commissioner's order and directed that it be implemented within four weeks from the date the judgment was uploaded on the Court's website. No order as to costs was passed.

Case Details:

Case Title: Suka Mahadu Khade & Ors. v. Bababai Tukaram Shevre & Ors.

Case Number: Writ Petition No. 7542 of 2026

Judge: Justice A.S. Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata

Advertisement

Decision Date: July 6, 2026

Advertisement

Take CourtBook Everywhere

Access your account on the go with our mobile app.

Get it on Google PlayDownload on the App Store
CourtBook Mobile App

Recommended Posts