Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup: October 9 - October 15, 2023

Nominal Index:

Union Territory of J&K Vs Abdul Qayoom Bhat 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 260

Ab. Hamid Bhat Vs Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 261

Ghulam Din Bhat and another Vs Mst Jana 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 262

Tabeen Mineral Water Private Limited Vs National Insurance Company Limited 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 263

Court On Its Own Motion Vs Comm. Secy. Govt. of JK Tourism and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 264

Nikhat Nabi v M/s Fancy Fabrics & Ors (J&K Bank Ltd) 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 265

Judgments/Orders:

Challenging Detention Orders, Getting Stay Before Execution May Prevent Proper Examination Of Evidence: J&K High Court

Case Title: Union Territory of J&K Vs Abdul Qayoom Bhat.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 260

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that after challenging a detention order before its execution through legal channels, they cannot argue that the order should be quashed due to a lack of live link between the current situation and the one when the detention order was issued.

A division bench of Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh and Justice Rajesh Sekhri reasoned that by preemptively challenging the order, they prevented a proper examination of whether there were adequate grounds or evidence for the detention order in the first place.

Smart Satellite Township: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Orders Reassessment Of Land Compensation To Claimants

Case Title: Ab. Hamid Bhat Vs Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 261

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed the government to reassess the amount of compensation and improvement charges to be paid to land claimants, emphasizing the need for a fair evaluation of the value of the land involved in the Smart Satellite Township dispute.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal dismissed the pleas as barred by res subjudice on the issue of tenancy but directed the reassessment of compensation/improvement charges based on current rules and parameters.

Can't Dismiss Appeals Solely For Late Submission Of Documents, Procedural Errors Can't Nullify One's Right To Appeal: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ghulam Din Bhat and another Vs Mst Jana

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 262

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the dismissal of the appeal by the appellate court solely due to the late submission of the certified copy of the order was not legally sustainable and amounted to a failure of justice.

A bench comprising Justice Javed Iqbal Wani emphasised that a person's right to appeal cannot be nullified simply because they did not strictly follow procedural rules.

Consumer Commission Can Revive Cases Consigned To Records, Does Not Qualify As Review Or Recall: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Tabeen Mineral Water Private Limited Vs National Insurance Company Limited

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 263

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that restoring a case consigned to records without an adverse order or a decision on parties' rights does not qualify as a review and hence such a case could be called back by the Consumer Commissions.

A bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice M. A. Chowdhary however acknowledged that the Consumer Commissions, except for the National Commission, do not have the power to review or recall their own orders on merits.

'Satisfied With Measures Taken By Authorities To Preserve Green Spaces, Parks': Jammu & Kashmir High Court Closes PIL

Case Title: Court On Its Own Motion Vs Comm. Secy. Govt. of JK Tourism and Ors

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 264

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court expressed satisfaction with the measures taken by the authorities regarding the maintenance and preservation of green spaces and parks in the region, particularly Srinagar and Jammu.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi after carefully reviewing reports submitted by the concerned authorities, decided to close the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on the subject.

Order 23 Rule 3(A) - Bar On Filing New Suits Only Applicable To Parties Involved In Compromise Decrees, Not To Strangers: J&K High Court

Case Title: Nikhat Nabi v M/s Fancy Fabrics & Ors (J&K Bank Ltd)

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 265

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that although Order 23, Rule 3-A of the Civil Procedure Code bars new suits from setting aside a decree based on a lawful compromise, the bar only applies to parties involved in the compromise and does not preclude strangers to the suit from filing independent suits to challenge the compromise decree.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani also added that while the law allows strangers to the compromise to file independent suits, the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court was not appropriate for the issues raised in this case.