VIVEK CHAURASIYA AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS
WRIC/34575/2025 · 2025-10-05
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 102563 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 102563 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34575 of 2025 Court No. - 33 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. It is contended that a declaratory suit was instituted by the father of the petitioners which was decreed on the basis of compromise. Against which, an appeal was preferred which was allowed, against which, the father of the petitioner preferred a second appeal before the Board of Revenue which was allowed, against which, the father of the private respondent had filed Writ-B No. 55394 of 2012 which was allowed by the order dated 15.01.2025 by the coordinate Bench and the matter was remitted back to the trial court with a direction to register the suit under Section 229-B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act and decide the same after framing of the issues. Post remand, on the application moved by the private-respondents for rejecting the plaint, the suit has been dismissed which is under challenge.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without framing the issues, the authority had dismissed the declaratory suit.
3. I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
4. From the perusal of the order impugned, it is clear that it was on the application moved by the private-respondent treating it to be application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC as to the maintainability of the declaratory suit filed under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the revenue authority had dismissed the suit on the ground that the suit is barred by the provision of law. The petitioner has a remedy of filing an appeal under Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Krishna Datta Tiwari, Yogesh Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sudhir Bharti Vivek Chaurasiya And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 9 Others .....Respondent(s)
Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, assailing the order passed by the trial court dismissing the suit.
5. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
6. However, in case, the appeal is filed within 15 days from today, the appellate authority shall not go into question of limitation and shall decide the same, strictly in accordance with law. October 6, 2025 A. V. Singh WRIC No. 34575 of 2025 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- AJAY VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad