99 Supp HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(M) No. 189/2025 CM No. 2932/2025 Caveat 1079/2025 Amir Majeed ….. Petitioner (s) Through: Mr. Mohsin Qadiri, Sr. Adv, with Mr. Pir Baseer-Ullah, Adv. V/s Oneeb Mukhtar Nathkhan ….. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Nisar Ahmad, Adv. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge ORDER 16.05.2025 1. The petitioner has challenged order dated 10.04.2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Srinagar to the extent that in the said order, certain observations have been made by the learned trial court as regards the merits of the defence put up by the respondent/defendant. 2. Issue notice to the respondents 3. Mr. Nisar Ahmad Bhat, Advocate who is on caveat accepts notice. Caveat is accordingly discharged. 4. Heard and considered. P a g e | 2 CM(M) No. 189/2025 CM No. 2932/2025 Caveat 1079/2025 5. It appears that the petitioner has filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 1.27 lacs along with interest against respondent/defendant before the learned trial court in accordance with the provisions contained in Order 37 of CPC. It also appears that the respondent/defendant moved an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC before the learned trial court seeking rejection of the plaint. Vide impugned order, the learned trial court has, while dismissing the aforesaid application of the respondent/defendant, observed that the defendant has raised triable issues as such the application cannot be accepted. The said observations have been made by the trial court at a stage when application for leave to defend filed by the respondent/defendant is yet to be considered. 6. The aforesaid observations made by the learned trial court with regard to the merits of the contentions raised by the respondent/defendant in application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC, are definitely going to have an adverse impact upon the case of the petitioner at the time of consideration of the application for leave to defend filed by the respondent/defendants. It was not open to the learned trial court to make such observations while dealing with the application P a g e | 3 CM(M) No. 189/2025 CM No. 2932/2025 Caveat 1079/2025 under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC and that too at this stage of the case. 7. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of by providing that observations made by the trial court in the impugned order to the effect that the respondent/defendant has raised issues which are to be decided at the time of trial of the case shall not be taken into consideration by the trial court at the time of considering the application for leave to defend. The learned trial court shall decide the application of the respondent/defendant for leave to defend the suit on its merits without getting influenced by the aforesaid observations made in the impugned order, most expeditiously preferably within a period of one month from the date a copy of this order is made available to the said court. 8. Disposed of as above. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 16.05.2025 Aasif