HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CM (M) No. 329/2025 Pronounced on : 15.12.2025 Uploaded on : 16.12.2025 1. M/S ECH EMM Photo Colours Pvt. Ltd., through Narinder Singh, Aged 72 years, S/o Sh. Santokh Singh, R/o Flat No. 10, Block-B, Sampark Society, Channi Rama, Jammu. 2. Narinder Singh, Aged 72 years, S/o Sh. Santokh Singh, Director, M/S ECH EMM Photo Colours Pvt. Ltd., Flat No. 10, Block-B, Sampark Society, Channi Rama, Jammu. .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through :- Mr. S S Ahmed, Advocate with Mr. Rahul Raina, Advocate v/s 1. Kiran Wazir W/o Sh. Abhay Singh Wazir 2. Amar Singh Wazir 3. Udhay Singh Wazir Both sons of Wazir Abhay Singh All residents of Wazir House Panjtirthi, Jammu. .....Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. Ashish Sharma, Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER (ORAL) 15.12.2025 1. By this petition, petitioners have challenged the order dated 04.12.2025 passed by the learned 1st Civil Subordinate Judge, Jammu in a civil suit titled “Kiran Wazir & Ors. Vs. M/S ECH EMM Photo Colours Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.” read with order dated 06.12.2025 passed by the learned Sub-Judge (Municipal Sr. No. 153 2 CM (M) No. 329/2025 Magistrate), Jammu, to the extent the evidence of petitioners has been directed to be closed. 2. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that despite filing a formal application for summoning the witnesses including concerned Nazir of the Court of learned Rent Controller, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu along with the record of the rent, the same has been rejected vide the order/s impugned. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents has drawn the attention of this Court to the impugned order dated 04.12.2025, wherein at Para 2, the following observation has been made: “Perusal of the record reveals that the opportunity of evidence with respect to defendant started from 31.03.2016 till today approximately 131 opportunities have been availed by the defendant and only 03 witnesses have been examined till date. The act and conduct of the defendant/applicant in causing delay is very much clear as when the two witnesses namely Malkeet Singh and R C Sharma appeared, no counsel for the defendant was available to examine the witnesses”. 4. It is further stated by learned counsel for the respondents that the matter is pending before the trial Court since 2004, the petitioners have only tried to delay the proceeding on one pretext or the other. However, he is under instructions to state that respondents have no objection if the instant petition is allowed with a direction to learned Sub-Judge (Municipal Magistrate), Jammu to allow the petitioners to produce the concerned Nazir of the Court of Rent Controller, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu along with the record of the rent so far deposited by the petitioners with him, in terms of 3 CM (M) No. 329/2025 the application preferred by the petitioners, within a stipulated period of time. 5. Be that as it may, in view of the statement made hereinabove by learned counsel for the respondents, the instant petition is disposed of, at its threshold, with a direction to learned Sub-Judge (Municipal Magistrate), Jammu to allow the petitioners to summon/produce the concerned Nazir of the Court of Rent Controller, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, along with the record of the rent so far deposited by the petitioners, within a period of two weeks from the date of passing of this order. (Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge JAMMU 15.12.2025 Manan Whether the order is speaking : Yes Whether the order is reportable : No Manan Mahajan 2025.12.16 01:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document