Uttarakhand High Court

CLR/38/2025 on 9 June, 2025

Author: Alok Kumar Verma

Bench: Alok Kumar Verma

                      Office Notes,
                   reports, orders or
SL.                 proceedings or
         Date                                            COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No                   directions and
                   Registrar's order
                    with Signatures
      09.06.2025                        CLR No. 38 of 2025
                                        Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma, J.

The revisionists-defendants have filed the proposed revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 challenging the order dated 22.02.2025, passed by learned Small Cause Court / District Judge, Dehradun in SCC Suit No.33 of 2023, filed for eviction, recovery of arrears of rent and mesne profit, whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the Application of the revisionists-defendants filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. Heard Mr. Neeraj Garg, learned counsel for the proposed revisionists and Mr. Siddhartha Jain, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. Mr. Neeraj Garg, learned counsel for the proposed revisionists contended that the proceedings of eviction of tenant has been contemplated under Chapter-V of the Uttarakhand Tenancy Act, 2021 (in short, "Act, 2021"). The case of the respondent- plaintiff is not maintainable under the provisions of the Act, 2021. A legal question arises for determination in view of Sections 22, 40 and Section 47 of the Act, 2021 vis-à-vis Schedule (ii), Clause (iv) of Section 15 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887.

4. Mr. Siddhartha Jain, Advocate, on the other hand, submitted that the revision should be filed within a period of 30 days from the date of impugned order. The proposed revision has been filed beyond the said period, therefore, the revision is barred by limitation.

5. Mr. Neeraj Garg, Advocate, submitted that the limitation for filing a revision to the High Court against any order of the Small Cause Court would be governed by Article 131 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which provides a period of 90 days.

6. Mr. Neeraj Garg, Advocate, has relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, passed in "Udai Bhan Gupta Vs. Hari Shankar Bansal and Others", 1984 (Supp) SCC 602.

7. Mr. Siddhartha Jain, Advocate, has relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad, passed in "Ravindra Kumar Agrawal and Another Vs. Sachin Agrawal", 2018 SCC OnLine All 6274.

8. The contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties are fairly arguable. Therefore, it would be appropriate to deal with the question raised by the parties by granting an opportunity to the respondent to file objection.

9. List on 25.06.2025.

10. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the proceedings will continue in the said SCC Suit, pending before the trial court, but judgment shall not be delivered.

(Alok Kumar Verma, J.) 09.06.2025 Shiv/