The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to identify vexatious litigation and the court's reluctance to act as an appellate court in the absence of jurisdictional errors or perversity in the lower court's judgments.

JUDGMENT :

By means of writ petition no. 687 of 2018 (M/S) filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 30.11.2017, passed by the Chairman, Revenue Council, Uttarakhand, Dehradun in Second Appeal no. 41/2015-16, Richard Wheeler Vs State of Uttarakhand & others as well as Second Appeal no. 163 / 2015-16, Aman Deep Singh & others Vs Richard Wheeler & others.

2. Writ petition no. 971 of 2018 (M/S) has been filed by the petitioner seeking setting aside of the impugned judgment and order dated 26.03.2018, passed by the Chairman, Revenue Council, Uttarakhand, Dehradun in Revision no. 166/2017-18, Aman Deep Singh & another Vs State of Uttarakhand & others. A further prayer has been made to declare respondent nos. 1 and 2 not to be the owner of property in question on the basis of sale deed dated 19.01.2009 and further to declare the said sale deed dated 19.01.2009 as an invalid document.

3. Facts leading to filing of aforementioned writ petitions are that the property in question consists of two old bungalows along with outhouses as well as 201 Nali and 10 Muthi land, being Khata Khatuni no. 01, situated in Village Papersali, Patti Khas Parja, District Almora and this property is divided on the spot into two estates known as ‘Deodar Estate’ and “Epworth Estate’. The present dispute relates to a part of Epworth Estate only. Both the estates, including the disputed property, are recorded in the revenue record in the name of American Methodist Mission, Almora (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Mission’) since 1902, but actually the physical possession of these two estates is not with the Mission. One portion of Epworth Estate is in physical possession of Puran Singh and the petitioner and the rest area is in physical possession of Richard Wheeler. Initially the property in question was in the exclusive possession of one Australian national, who continued in possession till 1947 and while leaving after independence he settled the property with two persons namely Mr. Dhawan and Mr. Keshar Singh (father of Puran Singh). It is averred that the petitioner came in possession of a part of bungalow in question and land appurtenant thereto about 24 years back through one Mr. Dhawan. It is stated that in the year 1992, Puran Singh, claiming himself to be the legal owner of the said bungalow started creating nuisance, and to avoid any further nuisance petitioner paid substantial amount to him and started living in said bungalow. It is alleged that in the year 2003, Methodist Church of India, whose name is not recorded in the revenue records, filed civil suit, being Civil Suit no. 64 of 2003, American Methodist Church & others Vs Puran Singh, in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Almora, seeking prohibitory injunction against the defendant Puran Singh restraining him from interfering with the possession and use of property in question by the plaintiffs. A prayer for injunction and no eviction decree was sought.

4. It is further alleged that during the pendency of aforesaid original suit, Methodist Church of India fraudulently sold the entire property comprising Deodar Estate and Epworth Estate, without possession to respondent nos. 1 and 2 through registered sale deed dated 19.01.2009. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 were impleaded as plaintiff nos. 2 and 3 in the original suit by the trial court. Subsequently, the plaint was amended and a decree for eviction was also sought in the suit. Thereafter, Puran Singh contested said proceedings and the civil suit was decreed by the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 16.04.2012 and an eviction decree was passed against Puran Singh and in favour of respondent nos. 1 and 2. When the petitioner came to know about the aforesaid judgment and decree passed against Puran Singh, he filed a recall application under Order 9 rule 13 of CPC before the trial court for recalling the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2012. The recall application w