Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 144591 (ALL)

SATI PRASAD AND 3 OTHERS v. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER TEHSIL BHEETI DIST. AMBEDKAR NAGAR AND 3 OTHERS

A227/3748/2025 · 2025-06-06

Manjive Shukla

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34899 Court No. - 5 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3748 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sati Prasad And 3 Others Respondent :- Sub Divisional Officer Tehsil Bheeti Dist. Ambedkar Nagar And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogesh Singh,Hariom Divedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J. 1. Heard Shri Yogesh Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, and the learned Standing Counsel appearing of the respondent no. 1-State. 2. In view of the order proposed, notice to Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 is dispensed with. 3. Shri Yogesh Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, at the very outset, has accepted that the petitioners have a remedy of filing an appeal against the preliminary decree prepared in Suit/Case No.1513 of 2023 (Ramjeet and others Vs. Sati Prasad and others), pending in the court of the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Bheeti, District Ambedkar Nagar. 4. Shri Yogesh Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, has further submitted that only difficulty with the petitioners is that the preliminary decree was passed on 24.04.2025 and the period of limitation for filing appeal, prescribed under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, is 30 days. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has requested that since this writ petition was pending before this Court, this Court may provide that if the appeal is filed by the petitioners against the preliminary decree within a period of two weeks, the same may be decided on merits. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and I find that due to some misconception, this writ petition had been filed challenging therein the preliminary decree dated 24.04.2025, though there is a remedy of appeal under the provisions of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 6. Since the petitioners were pursuing this writ petition therefore, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the petitioners file an appeal against the preliminary decree dated 24.04.2025 within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the Appellate Authority on merits. 7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 6.6.2025 MVS/- Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench