Sr. No. 1 Regular IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR LPA No. 95/2025 CM No. 2469/2025, Caveat No. 865/2025 Tawab Ahmad Ganai …Petitioner(s)/appellant(s) Through: Mr. Nissar Ahmad Bhat, Advocate. Vs. State (Now Union Territory) of J&K and Ors ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. M. Ayoub Bhat, Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE O R D E R 06-05-2025 1. Appellant (Tawab Ahmad Ganai) and respondent Nos. 6 to 9 are the son and daughters of Mst. Noori, wife of Nabir Ganai. Mst. Noori died on 22nd March, 2001. And she left behind a landed estate measuring 42 Kanals, comprised in Survey No. 235 (old) and 465 (new), situated at Chowdari Gund, Chadoora, Budgam. The estate of Mst. Noori was mutated by Naib Tehsildar, Chadoora, in favour of the appellant (her son) and one of her daughters namely Mst. Shafiqa (respondent No. 9) vide Mutation No. 4 dated 20th of November, 2003. 2. As a result, rest of her heirs (respondent Nos. 6 to 8), who were deprived of inheritance in the estate of their mother, preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Budgam. And the Appellate Authority, upon consideration of the matter, vide order dated 23rd July, 2005, set aside the mutation. 3. The appellant assailed the order dated 23rd July, 2005, vide Revision Petition (335/Jt. FC-AP) before the Financial Commissioner (Revenue) and Commissioner Agrarian Reforms. Which, however, was dismissed on 24th January, 2018. Whereafter, both the orders, referred to above, were assailed by the appellant vide OWP No. 1161/2018, which too has since been Junaid Ayoub I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document dismissed by the learned Single Judge, vide impugned order and judgment dated 27th March, 2025. 4. After we had heard the matter at some length, learned counsel for the caveators/respondents shared with us a copy of the judgment and decree dated 30th September, 2015, vide which the suit filed by respondent Nos. 6 to 8, for declaration and separate possession by way of partition, against the appellant (Tawab Ahmad Ganai) as also Mst. Shafiqa (respondent No. 9), was decreed by the Trial Court. And, accordingly, the plaintiffs and defendant No. 2 (Mst. Shafiqa) were declared owners and entitled to possession of 4/6th shares (one share each), and defendant No. 1 (Tawab Ahamd Ganai) was held entitled to a 2/6th share in the estate of Mst. Noori. Further, defendant Nos. 1 and 2 were restrained from alienating the suit property till the same was partitioned. It would be apposite to point out further that even the appeal preferred against the said decree, by the appellant, was dismissed by the First Appellate Court on 25th April, 2025. 5. The factual position as indicated above is not disputed by learned counsel for the appellant. Rather, upon being pointedly asked, he fairly concedes that the finding(s), judgment and decrees passed by the Civil Court, inter se the parties, on an issue, is/are binding on the revenue agencies. 6. Faced with this, learned counsel for the appellant, as always, fairly concedes that in the given circumstances, the only option that the appellant has is to assail the judgment and decree dated 30th September, 2015, as also 25th April, 2025 (ibid), by a regular second appeal before this Court, if so advised. Accordingly, he submits that he be permitted to withdraw the appeal. 7. In the wake of the above, and as prayed by learned counsel for the appellant, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. (RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE SRINAGAR 06-05-2025 Junaid Junaid Ayoub I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document