Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80468 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 38034 of 2024 Petitioner :- Harendra Singh Respondent :- State Of Up And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Brajesh Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Amar Jeet Singh,Arun Kumar Pandey,C.S.C.,Dharm Vir Jaiswal,Harsh Vikram,Pranjal Mehrotra,Santosh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following relief:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari call for record of the case and quash the impugned order dated 14.08.2024 passed by respondent no.3 (Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Nazibabad, District Bijnor in Case No.-4664 of 2023 (Computer Case No.-T202313160504664), (Asif Husain Advocate Vs. Harendra Singh Advocate) and order dated 24.09.2024 passed by the respondent no.2 (Commissioner Moradabad, Division Moradabad) in Case No.-2032 of 2024 (Computer Case No.- C202413000002032), (Harendra Singh Advocate Vs. Asif Husain Advocate), (annexed as annexure no.11 & 13)." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that while considering and hearing the application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C., the trial court rejected the same and simultaneously decreed the suit without even framing the issues and taking evidence. The revision filed by the petitioner has also been dismissed. 4. On a specific query made by this Court, Sri Harsh Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 could not inform the Court as to when issues were framed and evidences were led by the parties. Proceedings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 are regular suit proceedings and provisions of C.P.C. are applicable. The suit has been decreed even without framing issued though the defendant-petitioner has filed written statement denying the averments made in the plaint. 5. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff- respondent no.4 has submitted that the writ petition may be allowed and the preliminary decree may be set aside. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the same. 7. With the consent of the parties, order dated 24.9.2024 passed by the respondent no.2 as well as the preliminary decree dated 14.8.2024 passed by respondent no.3 is quashed. Matter is remanded to the respondent no.3 to decide the proceedings afresh after framing a relevant issues and providing an opportunity to the parties to lead evidence in support of their case. 8. This order has been passed in presence of Sri S.K. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.6, who has no objection to the same. 9. With these observations, the writ petition is allowed. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 S. Singh (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad