Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 674 (JK)

UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS. (RURAL DEVELOPMENT / SICOP) v. M/S SOLOMON SUSSEX SPORTS PAMPORE (SSI UNIT)

RFA/14/2025 · 2026-04-17

Sanjeev Kumar

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Serial No. 14 REGULAR LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(1125/2025) IN RFA 14/2025 UT OF J AND K AND ORS. …Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Alla-ud-Din Ganie, AAG Vs. M/S SOLOMON SUSSEX SPORTS PAMPORE ...Respondent(s) Through: None CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE ORDE R 17.04.2026 CM No. 1125/2025 1. This is an application for seeking condonation of delay of 4387 days in filing the Civil First Appeal to challenge the judgment and decree dated 30th November, 2012 passed by the Court of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Srinagar [“the trial court”] in Civil Original Suit No. 14 titled “M/S Solomon Sussex Sports Pampore Vs. State of JK & Ors.”. 2. The delay has been sought to be explained by pleading that the subject matter of the suit filed by the respondent herein was under investigation by the Vigilance Organization Kashmir in case FIR No. 10/2007, and that all records pertaining to the subject matter were seized by the Investigating Agency. 3. It is nowhere averred as to when the records were seized or when the same were obtained by the appellants. Rather, it has come on record that not only the judgment and decree impugned was in the knowledge of the appellants but they were also contesting the execution petition filed by the respondent for its execution. There are no other cogent Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 21.04.26 reasons put forth to explain a huge delay of more than four thousand days. 4. The application not only lacks bonafides but also does not disclose sufficient cause which prevented the appellants to file the appeal in time, despite being aware of it since the filing of the execution petition. 5. For all these reasons, we find no merit in this application, and the same is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the appeal bearing RFA No. 14/2025 also stands dismissed. (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR: 17.04.2026 “ARIF” Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 21.04.26