Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Hp and Anr. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Hp and Anr. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

One line added to the orders of the learned Courts below: all sale proceeds received by the respondents/defendants from the sale of the forest produce (subject matter of the Civil Suit) to be kept in a separate account, with details provided to the plaintiff; interim order, if any, vacated; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the orders of the learned Trial Court and the learned Appellate Court dismissing the petitioner's application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, filed along with the civil suit, could be challenged by way of this petition. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court did not disturb the orders of the learned Courts below (which had allowed felling of the trees while protecting the plaintiff's interest) but merely added a further safeguard regarding the sale proceeds.

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of by adding one more line to the orders passed by the learned Courts below, directing that whatever sale proceeds are received by the respondents/defendants from the sale of the forest produce, subject matter of the Civil Suit, shall be kept in a separate account and details thereof shall be provided to the plaintiff.

Key takeaways

The interim order, if any, stands vacated and pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla, CMPMO No.5 of 2025, decided 26th August, 2025 (Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge — oral): Kuldeep Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others. The petitioner challenged the orders of the learned Trial Court and the learned Appellate Court dismissing his application filed along with the suit under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code (and the appeal thereagainst). The Courts below had allowed the defendants to carry out the felling of the trees in question while protecting the interest of the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought an observation that amounts earned by the defendants from sale of the forest produce be kept in a separate account. Disposing of the petition, the Court added one line to the orders of the Courts below: whatever sale proceeds are received by the respondents/defendants from the sale of the forest produce, subject matter of the Civil Suit, shall be kept in a separate account and details thereof provided to the plaintiff; interim order, if any, stood vacated and pending miscellaneous applications stood disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No.5 of 2025 Decided on 26^th August, 2025 Kuldeep Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner: Mr. Mohit Jaitak, Advocate, through V.C. with Mr. Abhishek Nagta, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General.

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral )

By way of this petition the petitioner has challenged

the order that have been passed by the learned Trial Court as well as the learned Appellate Court, in terms whereof, the application filed by the petitioner alongwith the suit under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code has been dismissed and so was the fate of the appeal.

A perusal of the order passed by the learned Trial Court as well as learned Appellate Court demonstrate that though the learned Courts below have allowed the defendants to carry out the felling of the trees in questions, but the interest of the plaintiff has been protected by the learned Courts below.

2

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

interest of justice would be served in case an observation is made by the Court that whatever amount is earned by the defendants from the sale of the said forest produce, the same be kept in a separate account.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of by adding one more line to the orders passed by the learned Courts below and by directing that whatever sale proceeds are received by the respondents/defendants from the sale of the forest produce, subject matter of the Civil Suit, the same shall be kept in a separate account and details thereof shall be provided to the plaintiff also. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also disposed of.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

August 26, 2025 (Vinod)