Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up February 24 - March 2, 2025
Nominal Index:ABDUL MAJID SOFI vs UT of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 55Madan Lal Goria Vs State Bank of India 2025 LiveLaw(JKL) 56FAYAZ AHMAD RATHER vs TARIQ AHMAD WANI 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 57Kunj Lal Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 58Islam Ul Haq Peer vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 59Sugandha Sawhney Vs Union Of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 60Rajesh Tandon vs Mohd. Safeer 2025 Livelaw...
Nominal Index:
ABDUL MAJID SOFI vs UT of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 55
Madan Lal Goria Vs State Bank of India 2025 LiveLaw(JKL) 56
FAYAZ AHMAD RATHER vs TARIQ AHMAD WANI 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 57
Kunj Lal Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 58
Islam Ul Haq Peer vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 59
Sugandha Sawhney Vs Union Of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 60
Rajesh Tandon vs Mohd. Safeer 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 61
Mohit Mahajan Vs Sham Dass Gupta 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 62
Mohammad Shafi Beigh vs UT of J&K and Ors 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 63
ABDUL RASHID DAR AND ORS. vs MUZAFFER AHMAD DAR AND ORS 2025 LIVELAW (JKL) 64
UT of J&K vs Showkat Ahmad Tantry
2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 65
Judgments/Orders:
Case-title: ABDUL MAJID SOFI vs UT of J&K, 2025
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 55
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court directed that appropriate criminal proceedings should be initiated against the former Deputy Commissioner, Ganderbal for having filed a false pleading before the learned District Judge.
The court observed that this conduct of a responsible officer of the Government is reprehensible and shows that the said officer has no respect for the rule of law. The court also stated that the officer concerned did not think twice before filing a false written statement before the learned trial court with a view to defeating the claim of the petitioner.
Case Title: Madan Lal Goria Vs State Bank of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw(JKL) 56
While dismissing a writ petition filed by a compulsorily retired State Bank of India (SBI) employee, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court imposed a penalty of ₹25,000 for concealing crucial facts with the intent to deceive the Court regarding its territorial jurisdiction.
Case Title: FAYAZ AHMAD RATHER vs TARIQ AHMAD WANI
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 57
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that a single complaint for multiple dishonoured cheques is maintainable if a consolidated legal notice was issued and the cause of action arises from a single transaction.
The court held that a single cause of action arose for all four cheques in favor of the respondent for filing a complaint against the petitioner upon the expiry of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice of demand.
Case Title: Kunj Lal Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 58
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed an order directing the recovery of excess carriage charges amounting to Rupees over 4 Lakhs from a Fair Price Shop dealer, highlighting the violation of natural justice principles.
A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed that the failure to issue notice was an attempt to prevent the petitioner from having an opportunity to present his case, underlining the critical need for a fair hearing in administrative and quasi-judicial proceedings.
Case Title: Islam Ul Haq Peer vs Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 59
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that a statement leading to the discovery of contraband is not sufficient to prima facie show conscious possession with respect to the concealed material. The court said that mere possession will not be considered as an offence unless it was coupled with the knowledge of what was being possessed.
Case Title: Sugandha Sawhney Vs Union Of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 60
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, comprising Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M.A. Chowdhary underscored that toll plaza should not merely function as revenue-generating mechanisms to mint money from the public and directed the authorities not to establish any toll within 60 kilometres of the National Highway-44.
Case-title: Rajesh Tandon vs Mohd. Safeer
Citation: 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 61
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court quashed a criminal defamation case against a reporter who covered a story relating to the misuse of a public hospital ambulance by government officials. The court held that the news report did not name the respondent, nor was he explicitly quoted as being responsible for the said misuse.
Case Title: Mohit Mahajan Vs Sham Dass Gupta
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 62
Shedding light on the mandate of Section 13 of J&K Houses & Shops Rent Control Act 1966 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirmed the legal principle that while the law permits a suit for ejectment on the ground of personal requirement for reconstruction, it forbids a landlord from occupying a building obtained solely on the ground of rebuilding without offering the same to the evicted tenant at market rent.
Case Title: Mohammad Shafi Beigh vs UT of J&K and Ors.
Citation: 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 63
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that land classified as Shamilat-e-Deh, once shown as vested in the name of any person, is as good as proprietary land, and the owner is entitled to compensation upon its acquisition by the government.
Case-Title: ABDUL RASHID DAR AND ORS. vs MUZAFFER AHMAD DAR AND ORS,
Citation: 2025 LIVELAW (JKL) 64
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that it would take into account the date on which the death of a litigant was brought on the court's record for the purpose of calculating the limitation period for setting aside the abatement of the suit.
Case-Title: UT of J&K vs Showkat Ahmad Tantry
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 65
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court while dismissing an appeal, reprimanded government officials for preferring the appeal after a long period of delay. The court said that no clear reasons for filing the appeal after a prolonged period were forthcoming from the application for condonation of delay.