HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
MANAV SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
DEEPAK KUMAR – Respondent
Ofice Notes, reports, orders or
S N L o . Date proc R ee e d gi i s n t g ra s r o ’s r d o i r r d e e c r t i w on it s h and COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
Signatures
WPMS No.65 of 2026
Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Narendra Bali, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned order dated 17.05.2023, passed by the learned District Judge, Haridwar, whereby the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC was rejected, and further seeks a direction to allow the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC
filed by the petitioner.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned appellate court passed the impugned order without considering the material facts and evidence available on record. He further submits that since the question regarding the status of Swami Ramesharanand was raised at a belated stage in the judgement of the learned trial court, it was only then feasible and possible for the petitioner/plaintiff to collect the required documents and file them at the appellate stage for proper adjudication of the matter. Therefore, the observations made by the learned appellate court while rejecti
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.