Allahabad High Court

RITESH KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 23 September 2026
Bench: GARIMA PRASHAD AJIT KUMAR

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed; the petitioner may file a suit for permanent injunction under Section 9 CPC.

Summary

Petitioner Ritesh Kumar Singh filed a writ petition alleging trespass by private parties and seeking relief from the State of U.P. The petitioner argued that a suit filed by the private parties had been dismissed and that the State had not acted on his grievance. The State contended that the petitioner could still institute a suit for a permanent prohibitory injunction under Section 9 of the CPC and that the dismissal of the private parties' suit did not bar his right. The Court held that the writ petition could not be entertained for such relief and that the petitioner retained the liberty to file a suit under the CPC. Consequently, the writ petition was consigned to the records, effectively dismissing it, with a direction that the petitioner may file a suit if advised.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition can be entertained to grant relief for trespass committed by private parties when the private parties' suit has been dismissed.
Whether the dismissal of the private parties' suit bars the petitioner from instituting a suit for permanent injunction under Section 9 of the CPC.

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 9

Subjects

trespass
writ petition
Civil Procedure Code
Section 9 CPC
permanent injunction
High Court jurisdiction
dismissal of suit

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                        WRIT - C No. - 38678 of 2026


Ritesh Kumar Singh
                                                            .....Petitioner(s)


                                  Versus



State of U.P. and Another
                                                         .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)              :   Anoop Bhaiya Lal Shukla
Counsel for Respondent(s)              :   C.S.C.

Court No. - 1
                   HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
                   HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the State respondents.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the act and conduct of trespass committed by
the private parties.

3. It is submitted that the suit filed by the predecessor in interest of the
private parties already came to be dismissed, against which an appeal was
filed, which too was dismissed. It is sought to be contended that
respondent No.2 has been approached in this regard for appropriate relief
but no action has been taken.

4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that if the
petitioner is aggrieved by any act of interference or trespass being
committed by the private parties or otherwise, the petitioner may file a
suit for permanent prohibitory injunction. It is submitted that mere
dismissal of the suit of the private parties does not itself in any manner
deny the petitioner's right to institute a suit under Section 9 CPC.

5. In view of the above, we decline to grant any indulgence in the matter.
However, liberty rests with the petitioner to file a suit, if so advised.
                                                                                            WRIC No. 38678 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    6. Subject to the aforesaid, the writ petition is consigned to records.



                                                                        (Garima Prashad,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
                                    September 24, 2026
                                    Kuldeep




Digitally signed by :-
KULDEEP SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…