Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/1383/2026 of PARWATI MANDAL Vs MALTI VISWAS on 12 August 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1383/2026 Parwati Mandal --Petitioner Versus Malti Viswas --Respondent Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J 1. Ms. Bindu K. Nair,
UKHC010080912026
2026:UHC:7173
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMS/1383/2026
Parwati Mandal
--Petitioner
Versus
Malti Viswas
--Respondent
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Ms. Bindu K. Nair, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Piyush Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. B.D. Pande & Ms. Garima Sharma, Advocates for the respondents.
3. Petitioner is plaintiff in Original Suit No. 4 of 2024. Learned trial court vide order dated 04.04.2026 held that the court fee furnished by petitioner with the plaint of the suit is insufficient. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court by filing writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that petitioner has statutory remedy of appeal under Section 6A of Courts Fee Act, 1870, therefore, writ petition is not maintainable.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contended that Section 6A was added in the Courts Fee Act by an amendment made by UP Act No. 19 of 1938. She submits that the said amendment is applicable only in State of Uttar Pradesh and is not applicable in Uttarakhand.
UKHC010080912026
2026:UHC:7173
6. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, submits that in view of express provision contained in Sections 86 and 87 of UP Re-organisation Act, 2000, upon State reorganisation, all State Legislations, which were applicable in erstwhile State of U.P., became applicable in successor State of Uttarakhand.
7. This Court finds substance in the said contention.
8. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach the appropriate forum under Section 6A of the Courts Fee Act. Petitioner shall be at liberty to claim benefit of Section 14 of Limitation Act before the appropriate forum.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J)
12.08.2026 Aswal
NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85 f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D2 6F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2026.08.12 06:30:28 -07'00'