Court cancels ₹2,000-crore controversial Mundhwa land deal

The court directed the sub-registrar at Haveli 4, Pune, to update its records and Index II to show that the sale deed had been cancelled. It also ruled that, following the cancellation, Amadea Enterprises LLP was “not entitled to claim any rights, title and interest in the suit property”

PUNE: A Pune court has cancelled the controversial sale deed for nearly 40 acres of ‘Mahar Watan’ land, valued at around ₹2,000 crore, in which deputy chief minister Sunetra Pawar’s son Parth Pawar’s company Amadea Enterprises was involved. The order was passed on May 8, 2026. The formal decree was issued on July 3, a copy of which was made available on Thursday.

Court cancels ₹2,000-crore controversial Mundhwa land deal

The court directed the sub-registrar at Haveli 4, Pune, to update its records and Index II to show that the sale deed had been cancelled. It also ruled that, following the cancellation, Amadea Enterprises LLP was “not entitled to claim any rights, title and interest in the suit property”.

The dispute relates to a registered sale deed dated May 20, 2025, for the land in upmarket Mundhwa where the Botanical Survey of India’s garden is currently located. The petition was filed by 272 watandars (land holders) and their legal heirs through their power-of-attorney holder, Sheetal Kisanchand Tejwani, against Amadea Enterprises, represented by Digvijay Amarsinha Patil, who is a partner in Amadea and Parth Pawar’s cousin.

“In their petition, the landholders said they had agreed to register the sale deed only after Amadea assured them that the sale amount would be paid at the time of registration or immediately afterwards. However, they told the court that despite the registration of the document, they did not receive any payment,” stated the court order.

During the proceedings, Amadea accepted the landowners’ claims in its written statement, leaving no factual dispute before the court. “The defendant has admitted all the material facts giving rise to the present proceedings…. (it) executed the registered sale deed but the consideration amount could not be paid…,” the court observed, adding that no physical possession of the suit property was ever delivered and the transaction did not progress beyond registration.

“The admissions made by the Amadea in its written statement are clear, unambiguous, unconditional and unequivocal. The defendant has not disputed either the factual background or the relief sought by the plaintiff,” the court said. Since Amadea admitted the facts, the court said there was no need for a full trial.

On the issue of the stamp duty paid by Amadea, the court clarified that it had not decided whether any refund should be granted. However, it said that both parties were free to approach the competent authority under the Maharashtra Stamp Act for refund or adjustment of stamp duty, if applicable, and that the court’s decree would serve as proof that the sale had been cancelled.