Uttarakhand High Court
Vinod Sonkar vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 22 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 942 of 2021
Vinod Sonkar .......Petitioner
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand & others .....Respondents
Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. I.P. Kohli, Standing Counsel, for the State/respondent no.1.
Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate, for respondent no.2.
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J (Oral)
The petitioner contends that his mother is the owner of a
piece of land measuring 54 square meters, which was allotted in her
favour on 25.04.1984, in pursuance to the Government Order No.9
Nazul-293 N/75 dated 25.02.1984, on account of the fact that there
had been a forceful act of the respondents of evicting the petitioner.
Aggrieved against the wrongful action, the petitioner had preferred a
writ petition earlier before this Court, being WPMS No.529 of 2021,
which was disposed of by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide its
judgment on 05.03.2021, with a direction to the Municipal
Commissioner, to decide the representation of the petitioner.
Subsequent to it, the representation of the petitioner had been decided
by the Nagar Nigam.
2. At this stage, I am not concerned with the above
proceedings, so far it was held, because admittedly thereafter the
petitioner has instituted a regular civil suit before the court of Civil
Judge, Senior Division, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar,
praying for a grant of decree of permanent injunction in relation to the
property in dispute, which was alleged to have been allotted to the
mother of the petitioner on 25.02.1984. The suit in question, which
was instituted on 27.03.2021, had accompanied with it, an application
under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC, on which the learned trial
court instead of granting an ex-parte temporary injunction had issued
notices to the respondents under Order 39 Rule 3 of CPC, and had
fixed the date in the matter for 27.04.2021, as to be an order for
consideration of the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the
CPC. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed by the
petitioner/plaintiff for the following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue any other suitable writ, order or directions in
the appropriate nature to direct to Civil Judge (S.D.)
Rudrapur to decide the application for temporary
injunction of petitioner on the next date of listing i.e.
27.04.2021.
(ii) Issue any other suitable writ, order or
directions in appropriate nature directing the respondents
to not to evict the petitioner from its property/holding
until and unless the application for petitioner for
temporary injunction did not finalized.
(iii) Issue any other suitable writ, order or
directions which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the circumstances of the case."
3. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
this writ petition is being disposed of with a request to the court of
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar,
to decide the aforesaid application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the
CPC, within a period of two months from the date of the production of
the certified copy of this judgment, and if possible, and if the
respondents have put in appearance already in the suit in question,
then atleast, on the next date fixed i.e. 27.04.2021.
4. Subject to the above, the writ petition stands disposed of
accordingly.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
22.04.2021
NR/
