Dismissed

Mohammad Dawood Mir and Anr. v. Union Territory of J and K and Anr. (Revenue Department)

J&K HC4 Dec 2021CM(M)/192/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order dismissed a supervisory jurisdiction petition challenging an ex-parte interim injunction. The court declined to interfere as an appeal remedy was available and noted the trial court had already heard arguments and fixed a hearing date for the application.

What did the court decide?

The petition and connected CM No. 7975/2021 were dismissed without granting any direction to the trial court.

Mohammad Dawood Mir and Anr. Vs Union Territory… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | J&K HC (2021)

¶1

Supp List 1 Serial No. 31

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶3

CM (M) No. 192/2021

¶4

CM No. 7975/2021

¶5

Mohammad Dawood Mir and another

¶6

Petitioner(s)/ Appellant(s)

¶7

Through: - Mr Gulzar Ahmad Bhat, Advocate. V/s

¶8

Union Territory of J&K and Others

…..Respondent(s)

Through: -

CORAM:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, Judge.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

04.12.2021

¶15

Although the instant petition has been filed by the petitioner while invoking Supervisory Jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, yet the petitioners have prayed for grant of Writ of Certiorari and Mandamus, which cannot be granted under Article 227.

¶16

Be that as it is, order dated 17.09.2021 passed by the trial court is being questioned in the instant petition besides seeking a direction that the trial court shall decide the application for injunction within a reasonable stipulated period, in accordance with law.

¶17

Perusal of the record reveals that a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction along with application for interim relief had been instituted by the plaintiffs/respondent No. 2 herein on 17.09.2021. An injunction order is passed by the trial court in the application for interim relief accompanying on 17.09.2021 in ex-parte, while dispensing with the

¶18

requirement of issuance of a prior notice under and in terms of Order 39 Rule 03 CPC.

¶19

2 CM(M) 192/2021

¶20

Perusal of the record of the petition would reveal that an application for vacation of ex-parte interim order had been filed by the defendants/petitioners herein on 24.09.2021.

¶21

Record would further reveal that objections to the said application had been filed by the plaintiff/respondent No. 2 herein on 29.10.2021.

¶22

Perusal of record attached to the petition in the form of interlocutory orders passed by the trial court in the proceedings would reveal that trial court on 08.10.2021, adjourned the consideration of the application when counsel for the non-applicant/plaintiff had sought time for filing objections to the application filed by defendant/petitioners herein for vacation of interim order and posted the case for 29.10.2021.

¶23

On 29.10.2021, copies of the pleadings/objections have been exchanged by appearing counsel for the parties and the trial court seemingly has posted the application for interim relief for arguments on 03.11.2021.

¶24

Perusal of the record would further reveal that on 03.11.2021, the case was not been argued despite the fact that counsel for the parties had appeared, but sought time to argue the case and case has been posted by the trial court on 07.11.2021, on which date arguments have been heard by the trial court and has posted the case for further proceedings on 14.12.2021.

¶25

Having regard to the grievance projected in the petition and nature of relief sought by the petitioner while seeking quashment of interim order dated 17.09.2021, this court may not exercise Supervisory Jurisdiction in view of the fact that a remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner even against ex-parte interim order in terms of Order 43 CPC, more so when the parties have already argued the interim application before the trial court. In

¶26

3 CM(M) 192/2021

¶27

so far as the second relief prayed in the petition is concerned, wherein the petitioner seeks a direction against the trial court to decide the application of injunction, the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of such relief, in view of the fact that the trial court is seized of the matter and has heard the arguments in application for interim relief, while posting the case for further proceedings on 14.12.2021. The trial court is expected to decide the said application and pronounce the order therein on the date fixed i.e., 14.12.2021, as such, there is no reason for this Court to display any indulgence.

¶28

The petition is grossly misconceived and entails dismissal and

¶29

is accordingly, dismissed, along with connected CM.

¶30

(Javed Iqbal Wani)
Judge
Srinagar
04.12.2021
“ Ishaq ”

¶31

ISAQ HAMEED BHAT 2021.12.08 14:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Mohammad Dawood Mir and Anr. v. Union Territory of J and K and Anr. (Revenue Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Dawood Mir and Anr. v. Union Territory of J and K and Anr. (Revenue Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Altaf Bhat Vs Rumaisa Jan and Anr.

Sardar Amanullah Khan Vs Mohammad Asgar Khan and Ors. (Home Department)

Noor Ali Vs Bashir Ahmed and Others

Tyndale Biscoe and Mallinson Society and Ors. Vs Gousia Asad

Ghulam Mohammad Mochi and Ors. Vs Mohammad Yousuf Shah and Ors.

Sonaullah Wani and Ors. Vs Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Revenue Department)

Khursheed Hussain Wani Vs Mohammad Akram Dar

Abdul Rashid Wani Vs Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Revenue Department)

Mohammad Altaf Bhat Vs Rumaisa Jan and Anr.

Tariq Ahmad Wani Vs Mohammad Saleem Ganai

Sardar Amanullah Khan Vs Mohammad Asgar Khan and Ors. (Home Department)

Manzoor Ahmed Sofi Vs Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Home Department)

Shahnawaz Ahmad Ganie Vs Union Territory of J and K and Anr. (Home Department )

Mubeena Bano Vs State Govt of J and K Others(Private)