24 December vs State Of Uttarakhand And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 6567 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

24 December vs State Of Uttarakhand And Ors on 24 December, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                                                      2025:UHC:11551



HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
      Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 3473 of 2025
                       24 December, 2025

Isteyar Ahmad                                           --Petitioner

                               Versus

State Of Uttarakhand and Ors.                       --Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
     Mr. Ankush Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel for the
     petitioner-defendant.
     Mr. K.S. Mehta, learned Additional C.S.C. and Mr.
     Sudhir Kumar Nailwal, learned Standing Counsel for
     the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent No.1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment and order dated 04.08.2025 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar, in Civil Revision No.53 of 2024 Farjana Begum and Another Vs. Isteyar Ahmad, whereby, the revision filed against the judgment and order dated 02.05.2024 whereby report of learned Commissioner was affirmed by the learned Trial Court, has been allowed and the objection of revisionists-plaintiffs (respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein) on the learned Commissioner's report was accepted and the order passed by learned Trial Court dated 02.05.2024 was set aside and further directed learned Trial Court to re-hear and pass the order in accordance with law.

2025:UHC:11551

2. I have perused the impugned order dated 04.08.2025 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar, which is a detailed order and contained well reasoning too good to interfere in the matter. Reasons cited by the learned Revisional Court, while setting aside the judgment and order dated 02.05.2024 passed by learned Trial Court, is sound and convincing, thus, Court is of the view that no interference is required exercising its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3. Accordingly, the present writ petition fails and is dismissed in-limine.

4. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 24.12.2025 PN