WPMS/3271/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 4078 UK

               Office Notes,
              reports, orders
SL.           or proceedings
      Date                                   COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No           or directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                 WPMS 3271/2022
                                 Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Neeraj Garg, Advocate, for the caveator/respondent no. 1.

This writ petition is directed against the order dated 25.11.2022, passed by

of 2022-2023. By the said order, learned Board of Revenue stayed effect and operation of the judgment and decree rendered by the First Appellate Court on 12.10.2022 and directed the parties to maintain status quo and also not to create third party interest over the suit property.

Petitioner contends that he had filed caveat application before the Board of Revenue. However, he was not heard before passing the impugned order.

The above submission is not disputed by Mr. Neeraj Garg, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1. He, however, defends the impugned interim order by submitting that both the parties were directed to maintain status quo and not to create third party interest, which is necessary to preserve the suit property. He submits that his client, namely, Smt. Shabana (respondent no. 1) had filed a suit for partition which was dismissed without even framing the issues and the first appeal filed thereagainst was also dismissed without framing points for determination. Thus, he submits that the stay of the judgment rendered by the First Appellate court is meaningless.

Be as it may, since a caveat application was filed by petitioner, who could not be heard by Board of Revenue, therefore, writ petition is disposed by directing that the impugned order dated 25.11.2022, passed by Board of Revenue, shall operate only for a period of four weeks hence. Board of Revenue is requested to consider the interim relief application filed by respondent no. 1 and pass orders afresh, after hearing both the parties, on the next date fixed, which is reported to be 30.12.2022, or on any other date within two weeks thereafter.

It goes without saying that Board of Revenue shall consider the prayer made by respondent no. 1 for interim relief, untrammelled by any observation made by this Court or the Courts below.

Objection, if any, against the interim relief application be filed by petitioner before the next date fixed.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 20.12.2022 Pr