Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Monthly Digest: April 2024 [Citations 70 - 97]

UT Of J&K Vs Shabir Ahmad Dar 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 70

National Insurance Co. Vs Rakesh Kumar Sharma 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 71

LYCEUM PUBLIC SCHOOL Vs UT OF J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 72

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Dr. Karan Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 73

Abdul Qayoom Ganaie Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 74

Ghar Singh vs University of Jammu & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 75

Balbir Singh Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 76

Abdul Hamid Sheikh Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 77

Krishan Gupta and others Vs D. D. Sadhotra and others 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 78

The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd Vs Golden Globe Impex Private Limited 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 79

Bashir Ahmed Naik Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 80

Hans Raj Vs Dilbagh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 81

“X” Juvenile Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 82

M/S Hotel Alpine Ridge Vs Union Of India and Other Connected Petitions 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 83

Vineeta Jamwal Vs Col (Retd.) Vijay Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 84

Ashwani Kumar Vs Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 85

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs Ramesh Chander Sharma and anr 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 86

Kamal Nain Singh Vs State Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 87

Building Operation Controlling Authority Vs S. Gurmeet Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 88

Veena Gurtoo vs Rajesh Kumar Gupta 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 89

Nazir Ahmad Pandit and Ors Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 90

Vinod Kumar Vs Jammu Municipal Corporation and another 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 91

Sumanta Dutta Vs Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 92

Shafket Ali and ors Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 93

Ali Mohammad Mir and Ors Vs State Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 94

Vasundhara Mittra and another Vs Aseem Tiwari 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 95

M/s Sarv Shakti Sewak Sanstha, J&K Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 96

Advocate Ali Mohammad Lone alias Zahid Vs Govt Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 97

Judgments/Orders:

Before Solely Relying On Statement Of Prosecutrix, Court Must Ensure Other Supporting Evidence Consistently Matches With Statement: J&K High Court

Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Shabir Ahmad Dar

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 70

Highlighting the stricter criteria for relying solely on the testimony of a prosecutrix (victim) in rape cases the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that before reliance can be placed upon the solitary statement of the prosecutrix, it must be ensured that her statement leaves no room for doubt regarding the factum of occurrence.

Workmen's Compensation Act | Eligibility For Claim In Case Of Death Depends On Ability To Prove Accident Arose Out Of & In Course Of Employment: J&K High Court

Case Title: National Insurance Co. Vs Rakesh Kumar Sharma

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 71

Delineating the critical importance of establishing a causal connection between accidents and employment in workmen's compensation claims the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that in case of an employee's death, claimants must demonstrate a clear link between the accident and the course of employment to be eligible for compensation under Section 3 of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923.

J&K Migrant Immovable Property Act 1997 | Possession Must Be Surrendered Before Appealing Eviction Order: High Court

Case Title: LYCEUM PUBLIC SCHOOL Vs UT OF J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 72

Underscoring the critical requirement of surrendering possession in appeals related to the J&K Migrant Immovable Property Act the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court said that surrendering possession of disputed properties is indispensable for appealing eviction orders.

Citing Sec 7 of the Act Justice Rajnesh Oswal emphasised,

“The perusal of Section 7 (supra), would reveal that surrender of possession of the property, which is the subject matter of appeal, is sine quo non for the purpose of entertaining an appeal against an order of eviction”.

Leasehold Interest In Land Is An Asset Of Company And Is Capable Of Valuation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Dr. Karan Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 73

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that leasehold interest in the land is an asset of the company and is capable of valuation.

The bench of Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Puneet Gupta has upheld the order of the Tribunal in which it was held that leasehold interest is to be included in the value of assets of M/s. Jyoti Private Limited so as to determine the fair market value of shares held by the assessee as well as other shareholders.

Not Detenue's Burden To Correct Typographical Error In FIR: J&K High Court Quashes Detention Order Due to Lapses By Authorities

Case Title: Abdul Qayoom Ganaie Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 74

Highlighting the importance of due diligence by authorities, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the detention order of a resident of Baramulla, Kashmir. A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti found several lapses by the authorities, including a critical mistake in the FIR reference, which rendered the detention order unsustainable.

Casual Labourers Have Intermittent And Sporadic Employment Whereas Daily Wagers Render Continuous Service: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Ghar Singh vs University of Jammu & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 75

A single judge bench of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court comprising of Justice Sanjeev Kumar while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Ghar Singh vs University of Jammu & Ors held that a Casual Labourer is labour whose employment is intermittent and sporadic, where as a Daily Wager renders continuous service and is paid on a daily basis.

"Reasons Are Heartbeat Of Every Conclusion": J&K High Court Quashes Order Lacking Reasons For Condonement Of Delay

Case Title: Balbir Singh Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 76

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated the fundamental principle that reasons form the bedrock of sound judicial decisions.

A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani emphasised that reasons are the heartbeat of every conclusion and struck down an order that failed to explain the rationale behind condoning a significant delay in an appeal.

Inquiry Not A Choice, Authorities Must Record Reasons For Skipping It Before Dismissing Employees: J&K High Court

Case Title: Abdul Hamid Sheikh Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 77

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that authorities cannot dismiss a government employee without recording valid reasons for bypassing a departmental inquiry.

In allowing an appeal from a cop against his orders of termination without due process Justices Rajnesh Oswal & Moksha Khajuria Kazmi observed,

“..the competent authority can dispense with the inquiry but after recording satisfaction that there are sufficient reasons which make the holding of an enquiry not practicable. So far as the present case is concerned, the respondent No.3 has miserably failed to record its satisfaction that holding of an enquiry is not practicable due to certain circumstances”.

Right To Sue For Malicious Prosecution Is Personal Injury, Cannot Be Enforced By Person's Legal Heirs: J&K High Court

Case Title: Krishan Gupta and others Vs D. D. Sadhotra and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 78

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the right to sue for damages for malicious prosecution is a personal injury and cannot be enforced by a person's legal heirs against the representatives of the one who initiated the malicious prosecution.

[O.38 R.5 CPC] Plaintiff Can't Use Provision As Tool For Coercion Or Easy Execution Of Decrees: J&K High Court

Case Title: The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd Vs Golden Globe Impex Private Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 79

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently cautioned against using Order 38 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) as a tool to coerce defendants or convert unsecured debts into secured ones.

In a judgment passed by Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, the court emphasized that this provision is an extraordinary remedy that should be exercised sparingly and strictly in accordance with the law.

District Magistrate Who Is Empowered To Issue Detention Order Can Also Revoke It Before Govt Approval: J&K High Court

Case Title: Bashir Ahmed Naik Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 80

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a District Magistrate has the authority to revoke a detention order passed under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA) until it is approved by the government.

[O.14 R.5 CPC] Allowing Court To Amend, Add Or Delete Issues Intended To Conclusively Determine Controversial Points Between Parties: J&K High Court

Case Title: Hans Raj Vs Dilbagh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 81

In a judgment passed by Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court shed light on framing issues under Order 14 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

The court clarified that the said provision is an enabling one intended to effectually and conclusively determine the controversial points between the parties and the power under this provision is exercisable by a Court either suo-moto or an application of a party.

Scrutiny In Proceedings Must Be Avoided To Insulate & Protect Juvenile: J&K High Court Slams Disclosure Of Identity Of Juveniles In Conflict With Law

Case Title: “X” Juvenile Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 82

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court came down heavily on courts operating in the Union Territories for routinely disclosing the identities of juveniles in conflict with law in their orders.

While granting bail to a 17-year-old boy accused of attempted murder in Samba district Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed,

“Courts working in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and the Union Territory of Ladakh, and, therefore, they are, with impunity, disclosing the full identity of the juvenile in their orders. It is high time that the Courts in the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh are made aware of the provisions of Section 74 of the Act of 2015”.

Easy Access To Justice A Facet Of Right To Life: J&K High Court Allows SARFAESI Actions To Be Challenged Under Article 226 Till Local DRTs Are Established

Case Title: M/S Hotel Alpine Ridge Vs Union Of India and Other Connected Petitions

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 83

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that the absence of Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) within the Union Territories (UTs) of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh violates the fundamental right to easy access to justice enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution.

In their earnest bid to advance hassle-free access to substantial justice Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh & Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal have emphasised that till such a fora or benches are established the litigants can invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

[S.151 CPC] Inherent Power Of Court To Do Justice Not Affected By Its Power To Recall Witnesses, Elicit Clarifications: J&K High Court

Case Title: Vineeta Jamwal Vs Col (Retd.) Vijay Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 84

Reiterating the importance of the inherent power of the court under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) to ensure a fair trial the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the inherent power of the court is not affected by the express power conferred upon the court under Order 18 Rule 17 of the Code to recall any witness and elicit clarifications.

Court Can Examine Whether Enquiry Officer Has Taken Into Account Relevant Material: J&K High Court Overturns Dismissal Order Due To 'Perverse' Enquiry Findings

Case Title: Ashwani Kumar Vs Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 85

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed the dismissal order of a Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) trooper citing perversity in the enquiry findings.

Justice Sanjay Dhar, in his judgment held that the Enquiry Officer had failed to consider crucial evidence submitted by the petitioner regarding his illness.

Manufacturing Defect From Day One Entitles Customer To New Car, Not Repairs: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs Ramesh Chander Sharma and anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 86

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a customer is entitled to replacement of vehicle if the car suffers from a manufacturing defect from the very beginning.

Highlighting the distinction between repair for wear-and-tear issues and replacements for inherent manufacturing flaws Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Puneet Gupta observed,

“Repairs may be called for if the vehicles purchased during the course of its use suffers from a technical defect and not where the vehicle has manufacturing defect”.

Magistrate Using Expression "To Ascertain Truth Or Falsehood Of Complaint" Indicates Intent To Proceed Under Chapter XVI Of CrPC: J&K High Court

Case Title: Kamal Nain Singh Vs State Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 87

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the use of the expression "to ascertain the truth or falsehood of the complaint in terms of Section 202 of the Code" in a Magistrate's order indicates the intent to proceed under Chapter XVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which deals with inquiries and investigations into complaints.

S.15 BOCA Act | Orders Passed By Authority Are Final, Can't Be Questioned In Any Suit, Application Or Execution Proceedings: J&K High Court

Case Title: Building Operation Controlling Authority Vs S. Gurmeet Singh.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 88

Dismissing a petition challenging an order passed by the J&K Special Tribunal, Jammu, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised the Tribunal's final authority in matters under the Control of Building Operations Act, 1988 and the limited scope of the High Court's writ jurisdiction in disputes involving questions of fact.

No Provisions Can Limit Or Effect Court's Inherent Powers U/S 151 CPC To Do Complete Justice: J&K High Court

Case Title: Veena Gurtoo vs Rajesh Kumar Gupta

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 89

Reaffirming the mandate of Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that courts possess the authority, even under this provision, to exercise the powers delineated in Section 144.

J&K High Court Closes Plea Against Alleged Pollution Caused By Kishan Ganga Hydroelectric Project Due To No Evidence Indicating Breach Of Environmental Safeguards

Case Title: Nazir Ahmad Pandit and Ors Vs Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 90

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that alleged environmental pollution caused by the construction of the Kishan Ganga Hydroelectric Project (KGHP).

In an order passed by Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi the court said,

“..in the absence of any specific denial or material indicating a breach of environmental safeguards, we do not deem it necessary to continue with this PIL and accordingly, the same is closed”.

Delinquent Employees Entitled To Copy Of Enquiry Report Even In Cases Where Rules Governing Disciplinary Proceedings Are Silent: J&K High Court

Case Title: Vinod Kumar Vs Jammu Municipal Corporation and another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 91

Reaffirming the rights of government employees facing disciplinary actions the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that delinquent employees are entitled to a copy of the enquiry report, even in cases where rules governing disciplinary proceedings do not expressly provide for the same.

BSF Act | Offence under S. 354 RPC Excluded From Purview Of “Civil Offence”, Cannot Be Tried By Summary Security Force Court

Case Title: Sumanta Dutta Vs Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 92

Nullifying the dismissal of a Border Security Force (BSF) constable, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that an offence under Section 354 RPC cannot be tried by a Summary Security Force Court owing to the fact that the said offence is excluded from the purview of the meaning of Section 46 of “civil offence” under the Scheme of BSF Act.

Stalling Whole Recruitment Process Antithetical To Public Interest: J&K High Court Lifts Freeze On Recruitment To 1395 Posts Of Panchayat Secretary

Case Title: Shafket Ali and ors Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 93

Prioritising public interest over the petitioner's claims based on a draft proposal yet to be approved the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court vacated the status quo order that stalled the recruitment process for 1395 Panchayat Secretary posts.

J&K Agrarian Reforms Act | Land Ownership Entry In Khasra Girdawari Can't Be Unilaterally Changed Or Altered Without Hearing: High Court

Case Title: Ali Mohammad Mir and Ors Vs State Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 94

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that land ownership entries in the Khasra Girdawari record cannot be changed without providing a proper hearing to the person named in the record.

J&K High Court Distinguishes Between Plaintiff & Defendant's Death During Pendency Of Suit, Says Injunction Right Survives Plaintiff's Death

Case Title: Vasundhara Mittra and another Vs Aseem Tiwari

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 95

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has made a crucial distinction between the death of a plaintiff and a defendant in an injunction suit and clarified that the right to injunction survives the death of the plaintiff and can be enforced by their legal heirs.

However, in the case of the defendant, the injunction is operative solely against the defendant and upon his death, the question of binding his legal representatives by injunction would not arise, a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar explained.

J&K High Court Closes Plea On Allegations Of Religious Interference & Maladministration At Machail Mata Shrine

Case Title: M/s Sarv Shakti Sewak Sanstha, J&K Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 96

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court brought closure to a case concerning alleged religious interference and financial irregularities at Machail Mata Shrine.

Taking note of the statement of the petitioners that they were satisfied with respect to the steps being taken by respondents on the issue the bench closed the plea.

J&K High Court Quashes Detention Order Against Alleged Jamat-E-Islami Member, Orders ₹5 Lakh Compensation For Violating Right To Personal Liberty

Case Title: Advocate Ali Mohammad Lone alias Zahid Vs Govt Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 97

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court quashed a preventive detention order, the fourth in a row, slapped on Advocate Ali Mohammad Lone, allegedly a member of the banned Jamaat-e-Islami.

In a scathing judgment penned by Justice Rahul Bharti, the court found "nothing in the name of reasonableness and rationality" in the detention order and imposed a compensation of ₹5 lakh on the authorities for violating Lone's fundamental right to personal liberty.