Serial No. 09 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR RFA 93/2024 CM(3282/2025) ZIA UN NISA AND ORS …Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Mir Umar, Adv. Ms. Sabiya, Adv. VERSUS PUBLIC AT LARGE Through: None. …Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE. ORDER 18.04.2026 CM No. 3282/2025: This is an application filed by Sheikh Mohammad Nayeem S/o Late Abdul Gani Sheikh R/o Hyderpora, Srinagar seeking impleadment as party to the petition. Nobody has been appearing on behalf of the applicant and today also none has appeared on behalf of the applicants. RFA No. 93/2024: 1. The appellants have challenged order dated 27-02-2024 passed by learned Principal District Judge, Bandipora, whereby petition under Section 214 (1)(b) of Succession Act for grant of succession certificate in favour of the appellants herein has been dismissed by the learned trial court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record. 3. It appears that predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners had filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Bandipora. It was referred to the Special Lok Adalat for settlement. It also appears that the complaint came to be disposed of in terms of settlement arrived at between the parties to the complaint by way of award dated 11-11-2021 passed by the Lok Adalat. 4. It seems that after the passing of the award by the Lok Adalat, the award-holder died, and the appellants, who claim to be the legal heirs of the award-holder, filed an execution petition before the learned Magistrate, which is stated to be pending in the said court. The legal heirs of the Award holder-the appellants herein approached the court of Principal District Judge, Bandipora, for grant of succession certificate so as to enable them to collect the proceeds of the Award before the Executing Court. 5. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned District Judge on the petition for grant of succession certificate filed by the appellants would reveal that the same has been dismissed on the ground that the Lok Adalat, while recording the compromise between the parties, has used the expression “dismissed” and, as such, there is not debt due to the petitioners/ their predecessor-in-interest. 6. The aforesaid view taken by the learned District Judge appears to be too technical because, when we read the award of the Lok Adalat as a whole, it is clearly discernable that the parties have been directed to be governed by the terms of the compromise, and the compromise deed has been made part of the award. Merely because, due to inadvertence, expression “dismissed” has been used in award of the Lok Adalat, the petitioners cannot be divested of the fruits of the award. The reasons adopted by the learned District Judge, Bandipora, in dismissing the petition are not sustainable in law. 7. In view of the above, the instant appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Bandipora, is set aside. The matter is remanded to the said court for decision of the petition for grant of succession certificate filed by the appellants on its merits in accordance with law. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 18.04.2026 Aasif