Disposed

Maya Devi v. State of U.P. and 15 Others

Allahabad HC5 Oct 2021WRIC/18909/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of a writ petition wherein the petitioner was directed to appear before the trial court for a partition suit under Section 116/117 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, with directions for cooperation and adherence to timeframes. An earlier order was quashed, and status quo was maintained until the suit's decision. The court also opened jurisdictional objections.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 03.07.2021 quashed; status quo maintained; petitioner directed to appear in partition suit within 15 days; parties directed to cooperate; jurisdictional objection allowed.

Maya Devi Vs State of U.P. and 15 Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18909 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Maya Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 15 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vatsala Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Krishna Kant Singh,Rohit Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

The respondents No. 4, 5 and 6 have filed a suit for partition of land holdings in which the petitioner is a party.

¶6

With consent of Sri Ravi Kant, learned counsel holding brief of Ms. Vatsala, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rohit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondents No. 4, 5 and 6 the following order is being passed:

¶7

(1) The petitioner shall appear before the learned trial court in partition suit instituted as Case No. T2021183404403002 of 2021 (Sunita Devi Vs Subhash Chandra) under Section 116/117 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the respondent No. 2/ Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sikandararu District Hathras within 15 days from the receipt of copy of this order downloaded from the official website of the High Court of

¶8

Judicature at Allahabad. The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶9

(2) All parties to the aforesaid suit are directed to cooperate in the proceedings pending before the respondent No. 2/ Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sikandararu District Hathras.

¶10

(3) The respondent No. 2/ Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sikandararu District Hathras is directed to decide the suit within the time frame and manner prescribed under Section 116/117 the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 read with Rule 107 of the U.P. Revenue Code, Rules, 2016.

¶11

(4) It is open to the petitioner to raise objections in regard to jurisdiction of the court below.

¶12

(5) The issue of jurisdiction shall be decided by the respondent No. 2/ Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sikandararu District Hathras before proceeding further.

¶13

(6) The order dated 03.07.2021 is quashed. The

¶14

parties are directed to maintain status quo over the disputed parcel of land till the decision of the proceedings under Section 116/117 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶15

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶16

Order Date:- 5.10.2021 Nadeem

Maya Devi v. State of U.P. and 15 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maya Devi v. State of U.P. and 15 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jayayuddin Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others

Saheb Ram Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Chairman, Permanent Lok Adalat and Another

Ambedkar Rao and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nirmal Kumari and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deepu Soni Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others