Narayan S/O Tatayarao Deshmukh vs The State Of Maharashtra on 11 June, 2012
14. Apart from the above, I find considerable
force in the arguments of the Counsel for the
petitioners that, mother's share should have been
excluded by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms),
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 18:39:41 :::
23 wp2025.91
Jalna in Case No. 88/L.HR./ICH/CR-5 dated 13th
March, 1990. It appears that, the judgment of
this Court in the case of Kamalbai (supra), was
not brought to the notice of the Deputy Collector
or M.R.T. As per the said authoritative
pronouncement, the mother is entitled for the
share. Paragraph-7 and 11 of the said judgment
reads thus :