##PAGE1##

2026:UHC:1

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 3575 of 2025

02 January, 2026

Surendra Singh --Petitioner

Versus

Aniruddh Kumar Sharma and Others --Respondents

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for petitioner.

Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel for respondent No.8-Gram

Sabha.

Mr. K.S. Mehta, learned Additional C.S.C. with Mr. Bhupendra

Koranga, learned Brief Holder for State of Uttarakhand/

respondent No.9.

Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

By means of the present writ petition under

Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has

challenged the judgment and order dated 25.08.2023

passed by learned Additional Commissioner, Garhwal

Mandal, Camp Dehradun, in First Appeal No.17 of 2020-21

Shri Aniruddh Kumar Sharma and Others Vs. Shri Surendra

Singh and Others, whereby, the said appeal was partly

allowed rejecting the order dated 29.12.2020 and learned

Lower Court was directed to give opportunity of hearing to

legal heirs of the deceased and to replace the legal heirs of

the deceased in the Suit; as well as the judgment and order

dated 28.11.2025 passed by learned Board of Revenue in

Second Appeal No.93 of 2022-23 Shri Surendra Singh Vs.

Shri Aniruddh Kumar Sharma and Others, whereby, the

second appeal was rejected.

2. The brief facts of the case are that father of

petitioner was in possession of the land Khasra No.10ka

measuring 0.2020 hectare and Khasra No.32Ga measuring

0.0530 hectare total area 0.2550 hectare situated in Mauza

Bhogpur, Tehsil Rishikesh, District Dehradun, since last 75

years and after death of his father, petitioner is in

possession of aforesaid land, name of Sh. Ramchandra and

1

2026:UHC:1

Sh. Nardev Sharma both sons of Sh. Parasram was

recorded in revenue record. Since petitioner’s father have

two sons namely Rajendra Singh Rawat and Surendra

Singh Rawat (petitioner herein), therefore, in family

partition the aforesaid land was came into petitioner’s share

by the family settlement dated 16.02.2004. In family

partition, Leechi Orchard and two shops situated were came

into petitioner’s share. But in the year 2009, petitioner’s

brother tried to interfere in the possession of the aforesaid

two shops, therefore, petitioner filed injunction suit bearing

Suit No.107 of 2009 Surendra Singh Rawat Vs. Rajendra

Singh Rawat, which was decreed vide judgment and decree

dated 25.02.2017. Petitioner’s brother challenged the

aforesaid judgment and decree dated 25.02.2017 in Civil

Appeal No.24 of 2017 Rajendra Singh Rawat Vs. Surendra

Singh Rawat, which was dismissed by the learned Appellate

Court vide judgment and order dated 03.10.2018.

Petitioner’s brother thereafter filed the Second Appeal

No.122 of 2018 Rajendra Singh Rawat Vs. Surendra Singh

Rawat, which was dismissed by Coordinate Bench of this

Court vide judgment and order dated 15.11.2018.

3. By aforesaid settlement dated 16.02.2004, land

in-question came into the share of petitioner and earlier

petitioner’s father and after his father’s death, petitioner is

in continuous possession of the land in-dispute, which is in

the knowledge of Shri Ramchandra and Nardev Sharma

both sons of Shri Parasram. Name of Shri Ramchandra S/o

Shri Parasram and name of Shri Aniruddh, Shri Dhananjay,

Shri Tribhuwan, Shri Shudhanshu, Shri Sridhar, all are

sons of Late Nardev Sharma and Smt. Sombala Sharma

W/o Late Nardev Sharma, were being recorded in the

revenue record, therefore, petitioner filed a suit under

Section 229B of U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act, 1951, before learned

Assistant Collector-1^st Class, Rishikesh, District Dehradun

2

2026:UHC:1

on 31.08.2012 after giving notice under Section 80 of CPC

dated 15.06.2012 to opposite parties, which was registered

as Case No.23 of 2012-13 Surendra Singh Vs. Ram Chandra

and others. Respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Smt. Sombala

(defendant Nos.2 to 7 in the suit) put their appearance

before learned Assistant Collector-1^st Class, but they did not

file any written statement before the lear