Jammu And Kashmir & Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up May 26 - June 1 2025

Nominal Index:MOHAMMAD SHABAN GANAI & ANR Vs MUSHTAQ AHMAD RATHER 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 201Rajinder Kumar vs State of J&K and Anr 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 202Ashok Toshkhani vs UT of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 203Mehmood Askari Vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 204Niket Kansal Vs Union Of India Through ED 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 205Anwar Hussain Wani & Ors vs State of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 206Chairman, Peaks Auto Jammu Pvt. Ltd Vs Harmeet Kour and another 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 207Adil Hamid Wani Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 208Manzoor Ahmad Wani Vs Ayaz Ahmad Raina 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 209Mst Zoona Begum vs Ghulam Mohammad Sheikh & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 210Mubeen Ahmad Shah Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 211Sheikh Showkat Vs Ghulam Jeelani Chesti & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 212Sanjeev Gupta vs Central University of Jammu 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 213Haleema Tramboo Vs UT Of J&K, Himalayan Welfare Organization Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 214Aamina & Ors Vs Aamir Ahmad Mir & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 215UT Of J&K Through P/s Chanapora Vs Sameer Ahmad Koka 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 216Judgments/Orders: Interim Directions Under Order 39 Rule I & II Of CPC Cannot Be Passed Against Non-Parties: J&K High CourtCase Title: MOHAMMAD SHABAN GANAI & ANR Vs MUSHTAQ AHMAD RATHERCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 201Reinforcing procedural rigour in civil litigation, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that interim directions under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) cannot be passed against a person who is not a party to the suit or appeal.J&K High Court Quashes Rape Case Against Man After Seven-Year Relationship; Says Allegations Emerged Only After Marriage RefusalCase-Title: Rajinder Kumar vs State of J&K and Anr.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 202The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed FIR registered against a man accused of rape and criminal intimidation, citing the delayed complaint and the long-term consensual relationship shared between the parties.Revenue Officer Has No Jurisdiction Over Urban Residential Property Under J&K Land Revenue Act: High Court Quashes Partition OrderCase Title: Ashok Toshkhani vs UT of J&KCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 203The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that urban residential property falls outside the scope of the J&K Land Revenue Act, 1996, and quashed an order passed by a revenue officer attempting to partition such a property.A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed that section 105 of the Act empowers a revenue officer for partition of land used for agriculture or related purpose, including structures and trees thereon while excluding sites of buildings in a town or village abadi or land appurtenant thereto.IT Act | Tax Exemption U/S 10(26) Not Allowed Without Proof Of Living & Earning In Specified Area: J&K High CourtCase Title: Mehmood Askari Vs Union of IndiaCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 204Clarifying the scope of income tax exemption under Section 10(26) of the Income Tax Act, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that the benefit under this provision is not automatic and can only be claimed when an assessee clearly proves residence in the specified tribal area and demonstrates that the income was actually earned from sources located therein.Discharge In Predicate Offence Does Not Invalidate PMLA Proceedings U/S 3 Of Act: J&K High CourtCase Title: Niket Kansal Vs Union Of India Through EDCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 205Upholding the autonomy of proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that a discharge or acquittal in the predicate (scheduled) offence does not automatically invalidate money laundering investigations or summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).Jammu & Kashmir High Court Quashes Seniority Benefits For Rehbar-E-Taleem Teachers Prior To Regularization Of ServicesCase-Title: Anwar Hussain Wani & Ors vs State of J&KCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 206The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that seniority of ReT (Rehbar-E-Taleem) teachers must be reckoned from the date of appointment as a general line teacher and the pre-regularization period of five years will not be included for the purpose of fixing seniority.Consumer Compensation Or Replacement U/S 14 Of Consumer Protection Act Requires Conclusive Proof Of Deficient Service: J&K High CourtCase Title: Chairman, Peaks Auto Jammu Pvt. Ltd Vs Harmeet Kour and anotherCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 207Reinforcing a critical principle under consumer law, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that for an award of compensation or replacement of goods under Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, it must be conclusively established that the service provider was negligent or deficient in service.Breach Of Fiduciary Trust By Manager Cannot Be Taken Lightly: J&K High Court Denies Bail in ₹71 Lakh Embezzlement CaseCase Title: Adil Hamid Wani Vs UT Of J&KCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 208Taking...

Jammu And Kashmir & Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up May 26 - June 1 2025

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags