Disposed

Pankaj Gautam and Another v. State of U P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023WRIC/2794/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the Allahabad High Court directed the Sub Divisional Officer (Judicial) to expedite a pending mutation appeal within six months. The court mandated the presence of the private respondent to ensure a timely disposal and prevent undue adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Sub Divisional Officer (Judicial), Karvi, to decide the pending appeal within six months after ensuring presence of private respondent.

Pankaj Gautam and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2794 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Pankaj Gautam And Another Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Mishra,Anuruddh Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anadi Krishna Narayana

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anuruddh Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents, Sri Aniket Gupta, Advocate holding brief of Sri Avinash Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 and perused the record.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for expeditious disposal of Appeal No.3784 of 2022 (Pankaj Gautam Vs. Vikas Mishra and others) filed under Section 207 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 pending before the Sub Divisional Officer (Judicial), Karvi, Chitrakoot.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are recorded tenure holders of plot no.1185M. situated at Village Rauli Kalyanpur, District Chitrakoot. The petitioners had taken loan from the respondent bank and due to some financial crisis, they are unable to repay the loan amount and as such the mortgaged property was auctioned. The respondent no.3, who is the auction purchaser had filed the mutation case under Section 34 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and Tehsildar, Karvi, District Chitrakoot vide order dated 20.7.2022 had allowed the mutation case in favour of the respondent no.3 on the basis of sale deed dated 25.4.2022. Being aggrieved with the order dated 20.7.2022 the petitioners preferred revenue appeal under Section 207 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 on 3.8.2022. It is further submitted that notices were issued to the private respondent and in spite of knowledge he is avoiding to receive the summons only to delay the disposal of appeal.

¶8

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel, the Sub Divisional Officer (Judicial), Karvi, Chitrakoot is directed to ensure the presence of respondent no.3 Vikas Mishra and to decide the Appeal No.3784 of 2022 (Pankaj Gautam Vs. Vikas Mishra and others) filed under Section 207 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, expeditiously in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunities of hearing to the parties concerned, preferably within a period of six

¶9

months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, without granting undue adjournments to either of the parties, unless there is any legal impediment.

¶10

With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 Kpy

¶12

Digitally signed by :- KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pankaj Gautam and Another v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Gautam and Another v. State of U P and 3 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

Ravi Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lalta Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashish Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 14 Others

Jagdish Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Smt. Seema Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Hansraj Vs State of U P and 3 Others