SHRAVAN KUMAR GUPTA vs SARITA GUPTA — CLR/37/2026

Case under Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 (Act No. 9 of 1887) Section 25. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 17th April 2026.

CNR: UKHC010051032026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

CLR/2715/2026

Filing Date

01-04-2026

Registration No

CLR/37/2026

Registration Date

01-04-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

REVISIONS ( 4 )

Sub-Category

UNDER SECTION 25 PROVISO OF PROVINCIAL SMALL CAUSE COURT ACT,1887 ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Decision Date

17th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 (Act No. 9 of 1887) Section 25

Petitioner(s)

SHRAVAN KUMAR GUPTA

Adv. SIDDHARTHA SINGH

Respondent(s)

SARITA GUPTA

Hearing History

Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah

10-04-2026

FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3

17-04-2026

FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3

Orders

10-04-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay
17-04-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah

The High Court of Uttarakhand dismissed the tenant's civil revision challenging the trial court's rejection of his amendment application in a landlord-tenant dispute. The court held that proposed amendments must be necessary for determining the real controversy; since the defendant's additional pleas regarding building demolition and shopping complex construction were irrelevant to the core issues of rent arrears and notice validity, their rejection was proper. The dismissal was also supported by an earlier High Court directive for expeditious case disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Uttarakhand dismissed the tenant's civil revision challenging the trial court's rejection of his amendment application in a landlord-tenant dispute. The court held that proposed amendments must be necessary for determining the real controversy; since the defendant's additional pleas regarding building demolition and shopping complex construction were irrelevant to the core issues of rent arrears and notice validity, their rejection was proper. The dismissal was also supported by an earlier High Court directive for expeditious case disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 (Act No. 9 of 1887) All acts →

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case