Saini And Other vs Unknown
2025 Latest Caselaw 4817 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Saini And Other vs Unknown on 13 October, 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.2807 of 2025
                                  Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Ms. Neeti Rana, Advocate for the petitioners.

2. This writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioners for a direction to the learned Assistant Collector Ist Class to expedite and decide the Restoration Application No.03 of 2017-18, Amit Saini and other Vs. Shyam Lal and others, within a stipulated time fixed by this Court and other ancillary reliefs for the compliance of the order dated 07.02.2018 restraining the respondent, his representative or successor (subsequent purchaser) from creating any third party interest over the property owned by them.

3. The relief no.2 is not being pressed by the counsel for the petitioners.

4. Accordingly writ petition is dismissed so far as relief no.2 is concerned.

5. The writ petition is being heard and decided only in respect of prayer no.1.

6. The respondent has filed a revenue suit in the court of learned Assistant Collector Ist Class/Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Dehradun, which was registered as Revenue Suit No.85 of 2005-06, Shyam Lal Vs. Doon Housing Company Pvt. Ltd and others.

7. The said suit was decided ex parte by the trial court.

8. The petitioners moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. r/w Order 1 Rule 10 and 151 C.P.C. for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree on the premise that the decree has been obtained by respondent-

plaintiff without impleading the petitioners as party- respondents, who are recorded owner of the suit property. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioners on the premise that the said Restoration Application No.03 of 2017-18 is still pending disposal before the trial court and the petitioners want that application to be decided expeditiously.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioners have also annexed the order sheet which reflected that except adjourning the matter for one reason and the other no further proceeding has been conducted in respect of the restoration application moved by the petitioners in the year 2018.

10. The petitioners have got a right of speedy justice, which is a fundamental right. The writ petition deserves to be allowed.

11. Accordingly writ petition stands allowed.

12. Learned Assistant Collector Ist Class is directed to decide the Restoration Application No.03 of 2017-18, Amit Saini and other Vs. Shyam Lal and others, pending before it expeditiously not later than three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 13.10.2025 SK