HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR (Th. Virtual Mode) OWP No. 92/2018 Manzoor Ahmad Ganai …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Salih Pirzada, Advocate. vs State of J&K and ors. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Mohsin S. Qadri, Sr. AAG with Ms. Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel Mr. Manzoor Ahmed Sofi, Patwari Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE ORDER 29.05.2025 ORAL 1. The prayer made by the petitioner in the present petition is for grant of compensation at the present market value of the land measuring 1 Kanal comprising survey No. 166 situated in estate Mufti Bagh, Srinagar. Further prayer has been made for restraining the respondents from creating any interference with the proprietary and possessory rights of the petitioner in respect of land measuring about 10 Marlas comprising Survey No. 166 situated in estate Mufti Bagh, Srinagar. 2. The petitioner has claimed to have purchased the land measuring 1 Kanal 10 Marlas comprising Survey No. 166 through the medium of sale deed dated 08.02.2011. The petitioner has also placed on record copy of the revenue extract, wherein the land has been shown to be as Shamlat Deh, in possession of the owners. Serial No. 7 2 OWP No. 92/2018 3. The respondents have objected to the claim of the petitioner by submitting that pursuant to the consideration order dated 23.01.2018 passed by this Court, the matter was thoroughly examined and the Tehsildar, Hazratbal after examining the record, vide communication dated 22.11.2019 reported that the land in question is recorded as Kahcharai as per the record and the land in question does not show the title of any person under name of Manzoor Ahmad Ganai and also the same is not at all in his possession. 4. Taking into consideration the stand of the respondents, learned counsel for the respondents was directed to produce the original Jamabandi record of the years 2006-07. 5. Pursuant to order dated 24.04.2025, Mr. Manzoor Ahmad Sofi, Patwari, Mufti Bagh, Srinagar is present in person along with the original Jamabandi record of the years 2006-07. A perusal of the same reveals that the land has been shown as Shamlat Deh but as Mehfooz Kahcharai. 6. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, this Court finds that there is serious dispute with regard to claim of ownership and possession made by the petitioner in the present petition, as such, in view of the disputed questions of facts, this Court is not in a position to determine the title as well as possession of the petitioner as claimed by him. 7. In view of above, the present petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy as available under law to establish his title and possession, if so advised. 3 OWP No. 92/2018 8. At this stage, Mr. Salih Pirzada, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that appropriate orders may be passed to the extent that period consumed in this litigation may not come in way of the petitioner in availing the appropriate remedy as available under law. 9. Needless to say that the petitioner can always seek benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act. 10. Disposed of. (RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE Jammu 29.05.2025 Sahil Padha Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No. Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No. Sahil Padha 2025.05.29 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document