Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4343 (UTT)

ANIL KUMAR v. VIPIN KUMAR MITTAL

WPMS/901/2025 · 2025-09-04

Pankaj Purohit

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMS No.901 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Rajveer Singh, Advocate for the petitioner, through video conferencing. 2. Mr. Anshu Kumar, Advocate for respondent no.1. 3. Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, Advocate for respondent no.3. 4. A Misc. Application (IA No.1 of 2025) has been filed by the respondent no.1 supported by an affidavit in which it has been stated by him that the interim order passed by the trial court on 04.01.2024, passed in Misc. Case No.24 of 2022, Anil Kumar Mittal Vs. Vipin Kumar Mittal and others, and order dated 23.12.2023 are put to challenge by the petitioner, in the present writ petition along with other ancillary reliefs. 5. It is submitted that the Misc. Case No.24 of 2022, Anil Kumar Mittal Vs. Vipin Kumar Mittal and others, has been finally decided by learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Roorkee, Haridwar, on 11.09.2024 and the succession certificate has been granted. The judgment and order dated 11.09.2024 is annexed as annexure no.2 to the Misc. Application (IA No.1 of 2025). 6. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner having full knowledge of the final decision of the Misc. Case No.24 of 2022, Anil Kumar Mittal Vs. Vipin Kumar Mittal and others, before this Court on 24.03.2025. The interim orders which have been passed in between merged with the final order dated 11.09.2024 passed by trial 2 court while deciding the application for grant of the succession certificate. As such there was no need to challenge these orders, after the case has been finally decided. Still those orders are challenged in the instant writ petition instead of challenging the final order dated 11.09.2024 by filing an appeal against order under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. 7. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed with a cost of ₹25,000/- to be recovered from the petitioner by way of arrears of land revenue. 8. Let the copy of this order be sent to Collector Haridwar, to recover the cost of ₹25,000/- imposed by this Court upon the petitioner – Anil Kumar s/o Late Mahender Mittal. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 04.09.2025 SK