ADESH SAINI v. REGISTRAR FIRMS SOCIETIES AND CHITS
SPA/342/2025 · 2025-11-11
G Narendar, Subhash Upadhyay
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 15256 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 15256 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:UHC:9900-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY Special Appeal No. 342 of 2025 11 November, 2025
Adesh Saini and Another
--------Appellants
Versus
Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits and Others --------Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the appellants. Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State/respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 and 4 through V.C. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT : (per Mr. G. Narendar, C. J.)
Heard Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State / respondent nos.1 and 2 and Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 and 4 through V.C.
2.
The short case canvassed by the appellants is that before the impugned judgment came to be passed the Registrar had already taken cognizance of the dispute raised and had passed an order referring the dispute under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The
order passed by the Registrar is dated 09.10.2025 and the
order impugned is dated 10.10.2025. If that be the case,
1
2025:UHC:9900-DB
then the mandamus directing the Registrar to consider the representation to be made by the petitioner, is virtually rendered futile.
3.
The learned counsel for the respondents would contend that the order is back-dated and is no order in the eye of law. If the respondent nos.3 and 4 are of the opinion that the order of the Registrar is vitiated by illegalities then it is open for the respondents to seek remedy in a manner known to law. Since the order of the Registrar holds the field, the impugned direction issued has rendered itself unworkable.
4.
In that view of the matter, the appeal is disposed of by setting aside the order of the learned Single Judge and permitting respondent nos.3 and 4 to work out their remedies in a manner known to law.
(G. NARENDAR, C. J.)
(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 11.11.2025 R/SS
2