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.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010051032026

Filing Number

CLR/2715/2026

Filing Date

01-Apr-2026

Registration No

CLR/37/2026

Registration Date

01-Apr-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

17-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 17-May-2026

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHRAVAN KUMAR GUPTA

    Adv. SIDDHARTHA SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SARITA GUPTA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha SahView PDF

    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.

  3. 17-Apr-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash UpadhyayView PDF

  5. 10-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 01-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CLR/37/2026

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.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case