SUHAS SHRIRAM BAVIKAR Vs. MAZHARULLA KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned Advocate Shri Pathan waives service for respondent no. 1 and learned A.G.P. waives service for respondent nos.2 to 5. With the consent of both the sides, the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) The petitioners had purchased an immovable property and Mutation Entry No.832 was certified in their favour. Respondent no.1 challenged that order by preferring an Appeal under Sec. 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. Since there was a delay of more than 26 years, even a request for condonation of delay was made. By the impugned order the appellate authority has condoned the delay.

(3.) After having heard the learned advocates of both the sides it transpires that the learned authority seems to have forgotten that though he was empowered to exercise a quasi judicial power and the justice not only ought to have been rendered but it should have been seen to be rendered has gone ahead and decided to condone the delay apparently, leaving some loopholes to create a reasonable doubt as to if an opportunity of being heard was really extended to the petitioners who were the respondent nos.4 and 5 therein.