HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 11391 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. This petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "(i)Issue, a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 07.11.2017 passed by Ld. Civil Judge (JD) Anupshahr District Bulandshahr in both cases No. 325 and 326 of 2011. (ii)Issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the Learned Civil Judge (J.D.) Anupshahr District Bulandshahr to condone limitation period and recall the suits No. 325 & 326 of 2011 (Rajesh Kumar Vs. Nihaluddin and others) and decide on merit expeditiously within short stipulated time which is dismissed in default by the Civil Judge Junior Division, Anupshahr on 07.11.2017. " 2. From the perusal of the writ petition, it is apparent that the petitioner filed two suits being Original Suit No. 325 of 2011 and Original Suit No. 326 of 2011. Original Suit No. 325 of 2011 was instituted for cancellation of sale deed dated 16.12.1998 and also for permanent injunction and Original Suit No. 326 of 2011 was instituted challenging the sale deed dated 24.04.1996 and also for permanent injunction. During pendency of these suits, the petitioner instituted two other suits being Original Suit No. 57 of 2016 and Original Suit No. 58 of 2016. Original Suit No. 58 of 2016 was instituted for the relief of declaration that the sale deed dated 16.12.1998 is not binding on the plaintiff. Similarly, Original Suit No. 57 of 2016 was instituted for a declaration that the sale deed dated Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mahesh Prasad Pandey, Vinay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Rajesh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 24.04.1996 be declared not binding on the plaintiff. In both the suits, application under Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C. was filed by the defendants which was allowed and the plaint was rejected by the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 31.05.2025. In between, the earlier suits instituted by the petitioner in the year 2011 were dismissed under Order IX Rule 3 of C.P.C. by order dated 07.11.2017 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division) Anoop Shahar in absence of both the parties. This order dated 07.11.2017 is under challenge in this petition. 3. There is no explanation of laches for challenging the order dated 07.11.2017. The suits in question i.e. Original Suit Nos. 326 of 2011 and 325 of 2011 were dismissed under Order IX Rule 3 of C.PC. According to Order IX Rule 4 of C.P.C., the petitioner may file a fresh suit or may move an application for restoration of the suits dismissed under Order IX Rule 3 of C.P.C. subject to limitation. 4. In view of these facts, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. September 19, 2025 Nitika Sri. A227 No. 11391 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad