Disposed

Hanif v. Ismail

Uttarakhand HC4 Sept 2024SPA/287/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Spiritn: This Special Appeal challenged an impugned order disposing of a Writ Petition without notice to the appellant. The High Court modified the order, granting the appellant liberty to submit a representation to the SDM within ten days for a collective decision. The appeal was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Appellant allowed liberty to approach SDM within ten days for collective decision of both representations; Special Appeal disposed of.

Hanif Vs Ismail — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Uttarakhand HC (2024)

¶1

2024:UHC:6358-DB

¶2

I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL

¶3

HON’BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE MS. RI TU BAHRI AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE RAKESH THAPLI YAL

¶4

0 4 TH SEPTEMBER, 2 0 2 4

¶5

SPECI AL APPEAL No. 2 8 7 OF 2 0 2 4

Hanif.

…Appellant Versus

Ismail and others.

…Respondents Counsel for the appellant. : Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel. Counsel for respondent no. 1. : Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel. Counsel for respondent nos. 2 to : Mr. M.S. Bisht, learned Brief Holder 4. for the State of Uttarakhand.

¶10

JUDGMENT : ( per Ms. Rit u Bah r i, C.J.)

¶11

The present Special Appeal has been filed against the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 2065/ 2024 dated 30.07.2024, whereby the said Writ Petition has been disposed of.

¶12

Counsel for the appellant contends that the impugned judgment dated 30.07.2024 was passed on the very first date of hearing, and he was respondent no. 4 in the Writ Petition, and notice was not issued to him. He has further informed this Court that a Civil Suit is pending with respect to this construction of the wall, which, according to him, is on his own land.

¶13

¶14

2024:UHC:6358-DB

¶15

Since, as per the order dated 30.07.2024, the petitioner therein has been given liberty to make a representation to the SDM, and he has to pass order thereupon within four weeks thereafter, the order dated 30.07.2024 is being modified that the appellant herein can also approach the SDM by making a representation within ten days from today, and both the representations made by the petitioner in the Writ Petition, and the appellant herein will be decided collectively.

¶16

The present Special Appeal stands disposed of with the above-said observations.

¶17

Pending application(s), if any, also stand

¶18

disposed of accordingly.

¶19

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ RI TU BAHRI , C.J.

¶20

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ RAKESH THAPLI YAL, J.

¶21

Dt: 04^th September, 2024 Rahul

¶22

Digitally signed by RAHUL PRAJAPATI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=aa4fa3bee6691397758b14516ed3e66e61bf4c84874 1983ed8c39e4145cf1dab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=303B55CC3063D34AC45BF8A192FCAD15C390 A1AAD7B39857D2540AE4C28A4898, cn=RAHUL PRAJAPATI Date: 2024.09.04 14:49:18 +05'30'

¶23

Hanif v. Ismail

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanif v. Ismail

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Singh Koranga Vs State of Uttarakhand

Ramesh Prasad Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Charan Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Vs Dinesh Chandra Bhatt

State of Uttarakhand Vs Anuj Sharma

Bhupendra Singh Mahara Vs State of Uttarakhand