Uttarakhand High Court
Lal & Ors vs Unknown on 29 August, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
WPMS No.2558 of 2025
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, learned counsel for
the petitioners/plaintiffs.
2. Mr. Anil Dabral, learned Additional C.S.C.
with Mr. Sudhir Nailwal, learned Standing
Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/
respondent No.1.
3. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel for
respondent No.2.
4. Petitioners/plaintiffs have put to
challenge order dated 10.04.2023 passed by
learned Assistant Collector First Class/SDM,
Haridwar, in Case No.06 of 2022-23 Madan
Lal & Ors. Vs. State of Uttarakhand & Ors.,
whereby, the application moved by the
respondent-State under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC
has been allowed, as well as the judgment
and order dated 29.05.2025 passed by the
learned Chairman, Board of Revenue in
Revision No.73 of 2022-23 Smt. Indrawati
and Ors. Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Anr.,
whereby, the revision filed by the
petitioners/plaintiffs has been rejected and
the order passed by learned Assistant
Collector-First Class was affirmed.
5. It is contended by learned counsel for
the petitioners/plaintiffs that Case No.06 of
2022-23 was instituted by the petitioners-
plaintiffs under 122B/229B of the
U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act for declaring petitioners/
plaintiffs as Bhumidhar of the land subject
matter of the suit. Since, the suit was
instituted against the respondent-State, an
application under Section 80 (2) CPC was
moved by the petitioners/plaintiffs. On said
application the notices were issued to the
respondent-State and the respondent-State
appeared on said notices before the learned
Trial Court and filed their written statement
to the revenue suit of the petitioners-
plaintiffs. The suit was decided after framing
of the issues and recording of the evidence on
its merits and the same was decreed by the
judgment and order dated 22.07.2016.
6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioners that on 13.04.2017, an application
under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC has been moved
by the respondent-State along with delay
condonation application under Section 5 of
the Limitation Act saying it to be ex-parte
judgment and order and for requesting to
quash it. The said application was allowed by
the learned Trial Court on 10.04.2023.
Feeling aggrieved, the revision was filed by
the petitioners-plaintiffs, which too was
dismissed as stated in the earlier part of this
order. Thus, the petitioners-plaintiffs are
before this Court.
7. It is contended by learned counsel for
the petitioners-plaintiffs that the judgment
and decree was never an ex-parte judgment
and the said judgment itself states that the
pleadings have been exchanged between the
parties and after hearing both the learned
counsel for the parties, the suit was decreed.
8. Per contra, learned State Counsel
submits that the application preferred by the
State under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act was allowed by
the learned Trial Court for the reason that
there was no permission granted on the
application moved under Section 80(2) CPC
and further no notices under Section 106 of
the U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act were issued to the
respondent-Gram Sabha, by the petitioners-
plaintiffs before institution of the suit.
9. Be that as it may. From bare perusal of
the judgment and decree dated 22.07.2016,
it appears that the suit has been decided on
merits after hearing both the parties and
therefore, application moved by respondent-
State appears to be misconceived.
10. Respondents are directed to file counter
affidavit(s) within six weeks.
11. Put up on 28.11.2025.
12. Till the next date of listing, the effect and
operation of impugned order dated
10.04.2023 passed by the learned Assistant
Collector First Class/SDM, Haridwar, in Case
No.06 of 2022-23 Madan Lal & Ors. Vs. State
of Uttarakhand & Ors., as well as the
impugned judgment and order dated
29.05.2025 passed by the learned Chairman,
Board of Revenue in Revision No.73 of 2022-
23 Smt. Indrawati and Ors. Vs. State of
Uttarakhand and Anr., shall remain stayed.
13. Stay Application (IA/1/2025) stands
disposed of.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
29.08.2025
PN
