Ranjeet Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

S.K. Mishra, J

Heard Vikas Kumar Guglani learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 01.12.2026, passed by Additional Commissioner, Kumaun Division, Nainital in Appeal No. 24(2015)-16)/59 (2015-16) as well as the order dated 29.02.2020 in the Second Appeal No. 15 year 1016-17.

It is apparent from the record that the original suit was initiated against a dead person, and though the petitioner was resident of the same village, where the suit land also situates and the dead person was also residing, they did not take any step of substitution of the dead and as the decree was against a dead person it is a nullity. This fact has been upheld by the Appellate Court. Moreover, in the original proceedings, the petitioner's title has been declared on the basis of adverse possession as is clear his name has been recorded in warg-9 (IX) having illegal possession over the land in question. Without any specific plea or finding regarding the ingredients to be satisfied to declare a person's title on the basis of an adverse possession the land in question was ordered to be recorded in the name of the petitioner.

In that view of the matter, there appears to be not an iota of merit in the Writ Application. Hence, this Court is not inclined to issue a notice in this case.

The writ petition is dismissed in limine being devoid of any merit.

There shall be no order as to the costs.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted to the petitioner on proper application.