Disposed¶21

Som Nath v. Subash Chander and Others

J&K HC8 Sept 2025CM(M)/248/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ex-parte interim order; refusal to extend interim protection; interim relief application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC to be decided on merits not in default; parties directed to appear with counsel on 20.09.2025; interim order remains operative till 20.09.2025; decision in absence of parties on pleadings; plaintiff's conduct in prosecuting interim relief application; Munsiff Hiranagar; Som Nath v. Subash Chander and others; CM (M) No. 248/2025; CM No. 5625/2025; CAV No. 2025/2025; Jammu; 08.09.2025; Sanjay Dhar, J.

What did the court decide?

Ex-parte interim order passed by the Trial Court kept in operation till 20.09.2025; parties directed to appear before the Trial Court through counsel on 20.09.2025 for hearing of the interim relief application, failing which it may be decided on the pleadings; a copy of the order to be furnished to the Trial Court.

Som Nath Vs Subash Chander and Others — J&K HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned Trial Court rightly refused to extend the ex-parte interim order in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff. +1 more

¶12

Court's answer

Till 20.09.2025 the ex-parte interim order passed by the Trial Court shall remain in operation.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

With a view to cutting short the controversy and ensuring that the interim relief application is finally decided on its merits rather than in default, both parties were directed to appear before the learned Trial Court through their counsels on 20.09.2025, on which date the Trial Court shall hear the parties through their counsels on the application for grant of interim relief.

¶19

Key takeaways

If any of the parties fails to appear before the Trial Court on the said date (20.09.2025), the Trial Court shall be at liberty to decide the interim relief application in the absence of the parties on the basis of the pleadings filed by them before the said Court.ratio¶19
Observation made in passing ('be that as it may'): the conduct of the plaintiff in prosecuting the application for grant of interim relief after obtaining ex-parte interim relief appeared not to have been above board, which seemingly compelled the Trial Court to pass the impugned order refusing extension; the High Court did not dispose of the petition on this basis.obiter¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CM (M) No. 248/2025 (with CM No. 5625/2025; CAV No. 2025/2025), High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu, Sanjay Dhar, J., 08.09.2025 — Som Nath v. Subash Chander and others. Writ petition challenging the order dated 30.08.2025 of the learned Munsiff, Hiranagar refusing to extend the ex-parte interim order in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff (matter posted to 10.09.2025 for consideration of the interim application). Noting from the minutes that the plaintiff's conduct in prosecuting the interim-relief application after obtaining ex-parte interim relief was not above board, but declining to adjudicate the dispute over his alleged avoidance of arguments (counsel asserting the case was taken up during lunch hours), the Court directed both parties to appear before the Trial Court through counsel on 20.09.2025 for hearing on the pending application for interim relief under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, so that it is finally decided on its merits rather than in default; should any party fail to appear, the Trial Court may decide the application on the pleadings alone. The ex-parte interim order remains in operation till 20.09.2025. Petition disposed of in these terms; copy of the order to be furnished to the Trial Court.

¶1

Sr. No. 3

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

CM (M) No. 248/2025 CM No. 5625/2025 CAV No. 2025/2025

¶4

Som Nath

¶5

…..Petitioners

¶6

Through: Mr. Anil Khajuria, Advocate

¶7

¶8

Subash Chander and others

¶9

.…. Respondents

¶10

Through: Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER 08.09.2025

¶12

1. Through the medium of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged order dated 30.08.2025 passed by Learned Munsiff, Hiranagar, whereby, while posting the matter to 10.09.2025 for consideration of interim application, the learned Trial Court has refused to extend the ex-parte interim order in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff.

¶13

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶14

3. Perusal of the impugned order would reveal that petitioner/plaintiff has avoided to appear before the learned Trial Court for the purpose of advancing arguments on application for grant of interim relief and the learned Trial Court has, while posting the matter for consideration of the application on 10.10.2025, refused to extend ex-parte interim protection granted in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff.

¶15

4. Learned counsel for petitioners has submitted that the plaintiff never avoided the arguments and that the case was taken up by learned trial Court during the lunch hours as is clear from the

¶16

CM(M) No. 248/2025

¶17

Page 2 of 2

¶18

impugned order as such, it was not possible for the counsel for the plaintiff to appear before the Court at the relevant time. 5. Be that as it may, one thing does appear from the minutes of the proceedings that the conduct of the plaintiff in prosecuting the application for grant of interim relief, after obtaining ex-parte interim relief, has not been above board which it seems, has compelled the learned Trial Court to pass the impugned order thereby refusing to extend that ex-parte interim order.

¶19

6. However, with a view to cut short the controversy and ensure that the interim application for grant of interim relief under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC is finally decided on its merits rather than in default, a direction is issued to the parties to appear before the learned Trial Court through their counsels on 20.09.2025 on which date, the learned Trial Court shall hear the parties through their counsels on the application for grant of interim relief. In case, any of the parties fails to appear before the Court on the said date, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to decide the application in the absence of the parties on the basis of the pleadings filed by them before the said Court.

¶20

7. Till 20.09.2025 the ex-parte interim order passed by the Trial Court shall remain in operation.

¶21

8. The petition stands disposed of in above terms.

¶22

9. A copy of this order be furnished to the Trial Court.

¶23

(SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE

¶24

JAMMU 08.09.2025 Mahavir

Som Nath v. Subash Chander and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Som Nath v. Subash Chander and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhilasha Sharma and Another Vs Pappu Ram and Others

Gandharb Singh Vs Rangail Singh and Others

Ghulam Hassan Beigh Vs Mohammad Yousuf Khan

Umar Farooq Khan Vs Razia Sultan and Anr.

Taja Begum Vs Ali Mohammad Mir and Anr.

Abdul Rehman Reshi Vs Lali Begum and Ors.

Yasir Ali Malik Vs Shifan Khanday

Farzi Alias Fazi Vs Ghulam Hassan Bhat and Others

Abhilasha Sharma and Another Vs Pappu Ram and Others

Karan Singh Vs Ut of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary, Revenue Department, Jammu and Another

Balbir SINGh Jamwal and Others Vs Satpal Sharma

Rajan Jain Vs Regional Passport Office Th Passport Officer Jammu and Others

Romesh Chander Vs U T of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary Revenue Deptt and Others

Saif Ud Din Malik Vs U T of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary to Government Rural Development Deptt and Others