JUDGMENT R. K. DESHPANDE J. 1. Heard shri ghuge, the learned counsel for the applicants, smt. K.r.deshpande, learned agp for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and shri ghare, the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 to 10. 2. The tahsildar exercising the jurisdiction under section 5 of the mamlatdar's courts act, 1906, has directed removal of obstruction on the dhura of gat no. 62 owned by the applicants. This order has been maintained in appeal. Hence this civil revision application. 3. Shri ghuge, the learned counsel for the applicants has basically raised two contentions. (i) that the spot inspection reports of talathi and naib tahsildar has not been taken into consideration by the authorities below and (ii) that the applicants have not been permitted to cross examine the respondents/plaintiffs. He, therefore, submits that the order passed by the authorities below are vitiated and hence liable to be set aside. 4. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, i have gone through the reports of the talathi and the naib tahsildar and the roznama, to judge the challenges raised. The spot inspection reports of talathi and the naib tahsildar indicates the creation of obstruction on the dhura of gat no. 62. The applicants were at liberty to cross examine the respondents/plaintiffs, however, without raising any objection, the applicants entered the witness box, deposed and also submitted for cross examination. They are also cross examined. In view of this, no fault can be found with the orders passed by the authorities below, directing removal of obstruction. 5. The contention of shri ghuge, the learned counsel for the applicants is that, there is no right of way available to the respondent nos. 3 to 10 from the dhura of gat no. 62. Shri ghare, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 3 to 10 invited my attention to section 22 of the mamlatdar's courts act, and submitted that the remedy of civil suit is available to raise a dispute regarding right of way over the boundary of gat no. 62 and he submits that any observation regarding right of way by the authorities below in the impugned order would naturally not come in the way of the civil court in dealing with the aspect of the mater. 6. 62 and he submits that any observation regarding right of way by the authorities below in the impugned order would naturally not come in the way of the civil court in dealing with the aspect of the mater. 6. In view of this, it is open for the applicants to file a civil suit raising all disputes regarding the right of way or the alternate way and claim appropriate decree or the orders and no interference is called for in the orders impugned in this civil revision application. In the result, civil revision application is dismissed. no orders as to costs.