DHANA DEOPA vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — WPMS/1782/2026
Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 10th June 2026.
CNR: UKHC010100622026
Filing Number
WPMS/5255/2026
Filing Date
08-Jun-2026
Registration No
WPMS/1782/2026
Registration Date
08-Jun-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )
Sub-Category
MISC MATTERS ( 47 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
10-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.DHANA DEOPA
Adv. D S MEHTA,KETAN ASWAL,KETAN ASWAL, ,KETAN ASWAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
-
2.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Adv. C.S.C.
-
3.SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE
Adv. C.S.C.
-
4.TEHSILDAR
Adv. C.S.C.
-
5.AUTHORIZED OFFICER
Adv. ASHISH JOSHI
-
6.STUTHI MINERALS PVT LTD
-
7.MAHESH JOSHI
-
8.SHARIK RAHMAN KHAN
-
9.BHUPESH JOSHI
-
10.FIZA DURRANI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar TiwariView PDF
Case Summary: WPMS/1782/2026 Petitioner Dhana Deopa sought to halt bank auction proceedings on mortgaged land by filing a declaratory suit under Section 229-B of the Zamindari Abolition Act, 1950. The court disposed of the writ petition, finding the matter inappropriate for writ jurisdiction and instead directed the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 within fifteen days, consistent with the borrower's previous direction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Jun-2026
Fresh Cases For Admission -260
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari
-
08-Jun-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WPMS/1782/2026
Case Summary: WPMS/1782/2026 Petitioner Dhana Deopa sought to halt bank auction proceedings on mortgaged land by filing a declaratory suit under Section 229-B of the Zamindari Abolition Act, 1950. The court disposed of the writ petition, finding the matter inappropriate for writ jurisdiction and instead directed the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 within fifteen days, consistent with the borrower's previous direction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts