Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12676 (JK)

GHULAM HASSAN QAZI v. ALI MOHAMMAD QAZI

CM(M)/279/2025 · 2025-07-22

Sanjay Dhar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

134 Supplementary HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(M) No. 279/2025 CM No. 4472/2025 Ghulam Hassan Qazi ….. Petitioner (s) Through: Mr. Bhat Khursheed, Adv. V/s Ali Mohammad Qazi ….. Respondent(s) Through: . Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge ORDER 22.07.2025 1. The petitioner, has challenged order dated 26.06.2025 passed by the learned Sub Judge (Special Mobile Magistrate) Budgam whereby during the pendency of the restoration application, the learned trial court while invoking powers under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, has temporarily restrained the petitioner herein from constructing roof towards the suit land. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record of the case. 3. It seems that the learned trial court while passing order has relied upon ratio laid down by this Court in case titled Vikram P a g e | 2 CM(M) No. 279/2025 CM No. 4472/2025 Handa and another Vs. Basketball Association of J&K reported in 2023(1) SLJ 114, wherein it has been held that the pending application seeking restoration of the suit, the trial court can invoke Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure to preserve the subject matter of the lis. 4. In view of the above position of law, it cannot be stated that the learned trial court, while passing the impugned order, has either committed any gross illegality or has exceeded. However, the learned trial court while passing the impugned order, has listed the application for objections on 11.07.2025 but at the same time, it has been recorded that the application of the respondent is allowed. Although it was open to the learned trial court to pass exparte restraint order against the petitioner/non- applicant yet the application could not have been disposed of without hearing the petitioner/non-applicant. The said part of the impugned order deserves to be set aside. 5. Accordingly, the petition is partly allowed and the impugned order to the extent of allowing the application under Section 151 of CPC is set aside and the petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned trial court to afford opportunity of hearing to the petitioner by allowing him to file objections to the application under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure P a g e | 3 CM(M) No. 279/2025 CM No. 4472/2025 filed by the respondent and thereafter pass final order in the said application in accordance with law most expeditiously preferably within a period of 15 days from the date the petitioner files his objections to the application. 6. Disposed of. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 22.07.2025 Aasif