SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS No. 573 of 2026 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. J. K. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Deepak Bhatt, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Brief facts of the case are that respondents – plaintiffs preferred a suit for adverse possession against the petitioners, who according to the petitioners, are actual owner of the property, in question, bearing Revenue Case No. 22 / 525 of 2020 - 21 (Sher Singh Vs. Diwan Singh and others) before Assistant Collector, Haldwani and the Assistant Collector, Haldwani granted temporary injunction order restraining the petitioners – defendants not to interfere in the peaceful possession of the respondents / plaintiffs. Being aggrieved, petitioners preferred revision before the Assistant Commissioner, which was allowed and the order of temporary injunction was set aside. Thereafter, another revision was filed by the respondents – plaintiffs before the Board of Revenue, set aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner and confirmed the order of Assistant Collector, Haldwani. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the suit filed by the respondent – plaintiff is not maintainable since he is claiming adverse possession on the ground that he is in possession there since last more than 40 years though as a matter of fact petitioners purchased the property in the year 2003 and the suit was filed in the year 2021. 5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he is not pressing the reliefs, as sought in the writ petition, if the Assistant Collector, Haldwani is directed to expedite the suit on day to day basis, within two month, since petitioner is 80 year old and respondent has no objection. 6. In such view of the matter, writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Assistant Collector, Haldwani to expedite and decide the Revenue Case No. 22 / 525 of 2020 - 21 (Sher Singh Vs. Diwan Singh and others) positively within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without giving any unnecessary adjournment to the parties, keeping in view the fact that petitioner no. 1 is 80 years old. 7. Till then, respondents – plaintiffs shall not create any third party interest over the property in question. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 24.03.2026 SKS