Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8195 (UTT)

GAURAV AGROHI v. JAGDISH SINGH PIMOLI

AO/190/2026 · 2026-07-16

Ravindra Maithani

body2026

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 D1- 12 UKHC010090142026 2026:UHC:5891 AO No.190 of 2026 Gaurav Agrohi ........Appellant v. Jagdish Singh Pimoli ......Respondent Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Jai Krishna Pandey, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Shubham Pandey, Advocate for the respondent. Heard. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant had purchased a property but the boundaries were wrongly mentioned in the sale deed, though the longitude and latitude, as established in the sale deed, falls on the same place which he has purchased. Therefore, he had moved application before the Tehsildar for setting aside the ex parte order of rejection of the mutation application. He seeks permission to withdraw the appeal with the liberty to file fresh temporary injunction application after change of circumstances. Permission is accorded. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty, as above. (Ravindra Maithani J.) 16.07.2026 RV