Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Irfanullah vs State Of Up And 9 Others on 11 August, 2025

Author: Prakash Padia

Bench: Prakash Padia





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135450
 
Court No. - 33
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 26754 of 2025
 

 
Petitioner :- Irfanullah
 
Respondent :- State Of Up And 9 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Laxmi Kant Tripathi,Yagyadhar Tripathi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mukesh Dhar Dwivedi
 

 
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
 

1. Since controversy involved in the above writ petitions are similar hence they are decided by a common order.

2. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayers :-

"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, calling for the records, and quashing the impugned order dated 26.05.2025 passed by respondent no. 2 (Annexure no. A-7) to the writ petition and also to allow the present writ petition.
ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of ad-interim mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 and to stay the operation and consequential effect of the impugned order dated 26.05.2025 passed by respondent no. 2 in ease no. 1388/2018, Babu Lal Vs. Samtullah, (Annexure-7) to the writ petition and the parties be further directed to maintain the status quo on the spot and also in respect to possession and entry in revenue record of the land in dispute which is subject matter of the disputed sale deeds, meanwhile, during pendency of the present writ petition, otherwise, petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."

3. The order dated 26.05.2025 passed by the respondent no.2-District Registrar/Addl. District Magistrate (F & R), District Deoria in the proceedings initiated under Section 72/73 of the Registration Act, 1908.

4. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by the respondent no.3 is per-se illegal and liable to be set aside.

5. On the other hand it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that in respect of the property in dispute a Will-deed dated 10.11.1991 was executed in favour of Habibullah, father of the petitioner and after his death petitioner and his brother became the owner of the property. For the reasons best known to the counsel for the petitioner the copy of the aforesaid Will deed is not annexed along-with the writ petition.

6. It is argued by counsel for the respondents no.3 & 4 that after the order impugned has been passed a deed has been registered in favour of the respondents no.3 & 4 by the Sub-Registrar, concerned, on 02.06.2025. Hence it is not a fit case for granting interim relief in favour of the petitioner.

7. The matter requires consideration.

8. Admit. Issue notice.

9. Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 & 2. Mr. Mukesh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel, has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos.3 & 4.

10. Issue notices to respondent no.5 to 10. Steps be taken within ten days.

11. Counter affidavit be filed by all the respondents within six weeks. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks' thereafter.

12. List after exchange of affidavits.

Order Date :- 11.8.2025 saqlain