Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court bars disturbing petitioners' possession of Raje Bhosale property

The Nagpur High Court has granted interim protection to Siddharth Dhangre and other petitioners in a case linked to the property of Raje Bhosale. The court said clearly that the petitioners' possession must not be disturbed until further orders.

The case began with orders of a subordinate court that rejected various objections raised over the property. Dhangre and others filed a writ petition in the High Court against these orders. After hearing the matter, Justice Nandesh Deshpande granted the petitioners this interim relief.

Senior advocate Anand Jaiswal argued for the petitioners. He said the order rejecting the objections cannot stand in law.

Jaiswal told the court that the petitioners are claiming rights over the property on the basis of the genealogy of Rani Kamalraje Bhosale. He also said there is a serious dispute over the identity of the property. According to the lawyer, the petitioners' lawful ownership and physical possession of the property have continued without a break. For this reason, the court was requested to safeguard their peaceful possession.

The court has issued notice to the respondents, Raje Raghujirao Ajit Singh Bhosale and others. Raje Raghujirao Ajit Singh Bhosale's side will be presented through his power of attorney holder, Vasudeo S. Agrawal. The respondents have been asked to file their reply by October 28 for final disposal.

The court has permitted the petitioners to serve the notice by all available means. They have also been directed to file an affidavit of service in court before the fixed date. While granting interim relief, the court once again reiterated that the petitioners' possession should not be disturbed.

The High Court's interim order is being seen as significant in this dispute over possession. For now, the petitioners' existing possession will remain protected, meaning the position cannot be changed until the final decision in the case.

The further legal process will be decided on the basis of the respondents' reply and the arguments of both sides. However, this interim relief cannot be taken as a decision on final ownership of the property.