Right of Way to Farmer from field of another by Tahsildar

It cannot be disputed that local Revenue Authorities may record finding as per their provisional inquiry and observations on the basis of modes such as spot inspection, inventory, inquiry into area etc. They cannot like competent Civil court conclusively decide legal rights agitated by the parties because legal right could be decided upon evidence recorded by the competent Civil Court, unless it's jurisdiction is barred by any law. 5) Learned counsel for the petitioners rightly relied on the judgment in the case of Pandurang Chandrabhan Bauche and antoher v. Jalindhar Sarandhar Tupe and others reported in 2009(3) Mh.L.J. 467 It is held that Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 confers independent right on an owner of an agricultural land to claim right of way for having reasonable access to his field. That right is not dependent upon proof of an easement, whether by way of necessity or by way of prescription as provided under the Easements Act. Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code confers a special right, only on the holder of agricultural lands as distinguished from an easementary right which is available if established according to law both for agricultural as well as urban properties. The observations in the case of Pandurang Chandrabhan Bauche and y antoher v. Jalindhar Sarandhar Tupe and others reported in 2009(3) Mh.L.J.467 would indicate that to enforce the legal right under Easementary Act, the party would have to approach competent Civil Court to get the legal right decided. The rights which are available under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code are statutorily available provisional rights which holder of the agricultural land may claim as provisional arrangement until the real controversy between the parties is conclusively decided by the competent Civil Court. If the claimant of the right of way is recorded tenure holder and there is prima facie title in him, the local revenue authority may on the basis of the preliminary inquiry and spot inspection etc. allow the right claimed provisionally but the claimant interested in declaration as to his legal right and enforcement thereof has to file a civil suit for final and conclusive decision as to the declaration, possession etc. in respect of civil rights claimed by him unless of course when the Civil Court's jurisdiction is excluded statutorily by express or implied bar. Bombay High Court Harichandra Pundlik Ughade v State of Maharashtra on 24 June, 2013 Bench: A.P. Bhangale Citation;2013 (6) MH L J 820