REENA MISHRA v. EXECUTIVE OFFICER NAGAR NIGAM DEHRADUN
WPMS/1799/2026 · 2026-06-15
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Original Suitbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7014 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7014 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:UHC:4846 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMS/1799/2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Ramji Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioner through video conferencing. Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate for the respondents.
2. Petitioner is plaintiff in Original Suit No. 127 of 2026, wherein she sought permanent prohibitory injunction. With her suit, petitioner filed an application seeking temporary injunction. The said application was rejected by trial Court vide order dated 30.05.2026 by holding that petitioner could not prove prima facie case.
3. Petitioner preferred appeal against said
order under Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC, which was presented before the In-charge District Judge on 03.06.2026. In-charge District Judge held that the case is not so urgent which may warrant hearing during vacation.
Order passed by In-charge District Judge on 03.06.2026 is challenged in this writ petition.
4. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the said order, as the summer vacation is coming to an end on 30.06.2026.
5. The writ petition, however, is disposed
2026:UHC:4846 of with a request to learned Incharge District Judge, Dehradun, to consider the prayer for interim relief filed by petitioner with her appeal on the date of institution of the appeal.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 15.06.2026 Mahinder/