Dismissed

Mymoona and Ors. v. Purnima Langoo and Ors. (Revenue Department)

J&K HC13 Sept 2021LPA/181/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In LPA No.181/2019, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed an appeal challenging a Writ Court order that maintained status quo in a property dispute. The appellants contended the order was passed in their absence. The court dismissed the appeal without discussing merits, directing appellants to seek impleadment in the writ petition before the lower court.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed. Appellants directed to apply for impleadment in the underlying writ petition OWP no.749/2009 before the Writ Court.

Mymoona and Ors. Vs Purnima Langoo and Ors. (Revenue… — Writ and Judicial Review | J&K HC (2021)

¶1

S.no. 22 Regular Cause List

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶3

LPA No.181/2019

¶4

Mymoona and others

¶5

……. Appellant(s)

¶6

Through: Mr M.A.Qayoom, Advocate

¶7

Versus

¶8

Purnima Langoo and others

¶9

………Respondent(s)

¶10

Through: Mr S.M.Ayoub, Advocate

¶11

CORAM :

¶12

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE

¶13

ORDER 13.09.2021

¶14

This appeal is directed against the learned Writ Court Order dated 27.05.2019, in OWP No.749/2009 titled Dr. Purnima Langoo vs. State of J&K and others, whereby the learned Writ Court has confirmed order of status quo dated 30.07.2009 till final disposal of writ petition and Deputy Commissioner directed to ensure that parties do not violate the orders of status quo with regard to the property in question.

¶15

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter.

¶16

A writ petition, being OWP no.749/2009, as is discernible from perusal of the file, has been filed by Dr. Purnima Langoo – respondent no.1 herein, seeking following reliefs:

¶17

(a) Writ of certiorari, quashing order issued by respondent No.2, under endorsement No.DKS/RD-465/Misc/Mig/396 dated 21.07.2007.

¶18

(b) Writ of certiorari, quashing Government Order No.415-42 dated 8^th March 1946, issued by the Government of Jammu & Kashmir Development Secretariat (Municipal Branch).

¶19

(c) Writ of mandamus, commanding respondent No.3 to register a criminal case against respondents 4 and 5 and after proper investigation in the matter, file necessary charge-sheet against these two respondents in the competent court of law for having committed the crime of forgery and fraud in trying to misappropriate the property belonging to the petitioner.

¶20

(d) Writ of mandamus, commanding respondents to restore the property of the petitioner back to her as lawful owner thereof.

¶21

LPA No.181/2019

¶22

¶23

As an interim measure, the learned Writ Court vide order dated 30.07.2009, directed maintaining of status quo. The learned Writ Court vide Order dated 27.05.2019 made the Order dated 30.07.2009 absolute. It would be appropriate to reproduce the Order dated 27.05.2019 here:

¶24

“Despite number of opportunities granted to the respondents, objections have not been filed. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is admitted to hearing. Issue post admission notice to the respondents. Requisite steps within one week. List on 18.07.2019.

¶25

Meanwhile, order of status quo dated 30.07.2009 is confirmed till final disposal of the writ petition. The Deputy Commissioner concerned shall ensure that the parties do not violate the order of status quo with regard to the suit property in question.”

¶26

According to learned counsel for appellants, the appellants are not party in the writ petition (OWP no.749/2019), and order impugned has been passed at their back and in their absence. The order impugned, it is next stated, is adversely affecting the rights of appellants.

¶27

Having an overall view of the matter and without making discussion on merits of the case, this Appeal is dismissed . However, appellants shall make an application before the learned Writ Court for their impleadment as party respondents in writ petition as also application for passing appropriate orders vis-a-vis impugned order as being affected party.

¶28

(Vinod Chatterji Koul) (Pankaj Mithal) Judge Chief Justice

¶29

Srinagar 13.09.2021

¶30

‘Qazi Amjad, Secy’

¶31

Whether approved for reporting? Yes/No

¶32

LPA No.181/2019

Mymoona and Ors. v. Purnima Langoo and Ors. (Revenue Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mymoona and Ors. v. Purnima Langoo and Ors. (Revenue Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Rafiq Shah and Others Vs State and Others (Revenue)

Mohammad Farooq Bhat Vs Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Food and Supplies Department)

Nazir Ahmad Wani Vs State of J and K and Ors. (Health and Medical Education Department)

Mohammad Tariq Buch and Another Vs State of Jk and Others (Hcourt)

M/S the Brains Traders and Consultants Vs Chairman, the Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited

Tariq Ahmad Baktoo Vs Commissioner, Smc and Others (Srinagar Municipal Corporation)