WPMS/241/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 2330 UK

                     Office Notes, reports,
SL.                 orders or proceedings or
          Date                                                 COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No                 directions and Registrar's
                     order with Signatures


      09.07.2021
                                                WPMS No. 241 of 2021
                                                Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

(Via Video Conferencing) Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Tapan Singh, Advocate for the respondents.

The petitioner, who is a plaintiff in a civil suit being Civil Suit No. 86 of 2015, which is presently pending consideration before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, had earlier approached this Court by filing a Civil Revision No. 107 of 2017, which was decided by this Court on 04.05.2018, directing the trial Court to conduct a survey and identification of the disputed property.

In compliance of the order which was passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 04.05.2018 in Civil Revision No. 107 of 2017, Dinesh and others Vs. Sumitra Devi and others, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the learned Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kashipur, has passed the impugned order, which is under challenged herein now and by virtue of the order, which is under challenged, in fact, the measurement of the land was conducted and after the measurement, being conducted and concluded, the impugned order has been passed by virtue of which, a detailed survey/measurement report has been submitted on records of the suit in relation to the property, which was the subject matter of the suit.

But, however, at this stage, apparently, looking to the writ petition, I am of the view that a writ petition in the exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, as against the judgment or order of the trial Court will not be maintainable because in view of the Uttarakhand Amendment made in the C.P.C., the order would be revisable.

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is being dismissed, with liberty open to the petitioner to approach an appropriate forum of preferring the revision against the impugned order.

The Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment, which is under challenged in the present writ petition by substituting the same with a xerox copy; in order to enable the petitioner to approach the revisional forum for challenging the impugned order.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 09.07.2021 Mahinder/