Citations 2022 [LiveLaw (JKL) 191 TO 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 200]Nominal Index : Ab Rasheed Bhat Vs HDFC Bank 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 191 Syed Akeel Shah vs Directorate Of Enforcement 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 192 Shailender Parihar Vs Sarmad Hafez 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 193 Mohammad Anwar Chowdhary & Ors Vs UT of J&K 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 194 Green Valley Sumo Taxi Stand Union Vs UT...
Citations 2022 [LiveLaw (JKL) 191 TO 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 200]
Nominal Index :
- Ab Rasheed Bhat Vs HDFC Bank 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 191
- Syed Akeel Shah vs Directorate Of Enforcement 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 192
- Shailender Parihar Vs Sarmad Hafez 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 193
- Mohammad Anwar Chowdhary & Ors Vs UT of J&K 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 194
- Green Valley Sumo Taxi Stand Union Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 195
- Mohd. Bashir Vs UT of J&K 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 196
- Ms. X (Minor) Vs. UT of J&K and others 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 197
- Raheela Nazir Vs J&K EDI 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 198
- Amina Begum Vs State of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 199
- State of J&K through police station Zainapora vs Zia Mustafa and others 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 200
Judgements/Orders :
Case Title : Ab Rasheed Bhat Vs HDFC Bank.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 191
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the production of original Power of Attorney is not necessary at the time of taking cognizance of the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,
"When the complainant/payee is a company, an authorised employee can represent the company. Such averment and prima facie material is sufficient for the learned Magistrate to take cognizance and issue process. If at all, there is any serious dispute with regard to the person prosecuting the complaint not being authorised or if it is to be demonstrated that the person who filed the complaint has no knowledge of the transaction and, as such that person could not have instituted and prosecuted the complaint, it would be open for the accused to dispute the position and establish the same during the course of the trial".
Case Title : Syed Akeel Shah vs Directorate Of Enforcement.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 192
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the question whether a particular case is of exceptional nature or not to warrant action under Section 8(4) of Prevention of Money Laundering Act can be determined only by the appellate authority at the time of considering the merits of the appeal and not by a Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.
Case Title : Shailender Parihar Vs Sarmad Hafez.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 193
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the expression "Application of Mind" is not meant as a matter of usage for ritual sake but is a living principle of law out of which an administrative/ judicial/ quasi judicial decision, as the case may be, must bear its natural delivery.
Application of mind" used frequently in legal parlance, the bench observed that any public official/authority, be it judicial, quasi judicial and/or administrative one, who knows it as a fact that he is meant to judge/decide matters being part of the very constitution of the office/position held/occupied by him/it, must be made to know it compulsively and consciously without any miss that there is and will be an ever present institutional demand upon his/its understanding to make a decision, which if and upon being questioned, by any aggrieved person who is to suffer the effects of the given decision, is able to self exhibit its factuality and legality so evidently and expressly so as to test and tax the wit of the person in questioning the given decision. This is what is and will be meant in real sense and spirit an act of application of mind on the part of the maker of the judgment/decision, Justice Rahul Bharti expounded.
Case Title : Mohammad Anwar Chowdhary & Ors Vs UT of J&K.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 194
The Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh High Court upheld the amendments to the Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005, by which 4 percent reservation was provided to 'Pahari Speaking People' in respect of each service, class, category and grade in services and posts under the Union Territory.
Case Title : Green Valley Sumo Taxi Stand Union Vs UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 195
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a plea seeking exemption from the requirement of installing Vehicle Location Tracking Devices (VLTD) and Panic Buttons in public service vehicles till establishment of Command and Control centres in the union territory.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar said the "court cannot issue a writ of mandamus to the authorities for acting contrary to the statutory Rules."
Case Title : Mohd. Bashir Vs UT of J&K
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 196
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court took suo moto notice of the lack of "even elementary knowledge" regarding land laws displayed by an Additional Deputy Commissioner in Rajouri district who is conferred with powers of Commissioner under the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 and that of Collector under the Land Revenue Act, 1996.
A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti thus directed the Financial Commissioner Revenue/ Commissioner, Agrarian Reforms to withdraw such powers from the concerned official.
Case Title: Ms. X (Minor) Vs. UT of J&K and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 197
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court directed a medical board in Srinagar to undertake a fresh examination of a minor rape victim to take a final call on her request for termination of pregnancy of 22-23 weeks.
"Should the respondents 2 and 3 on the basis of said medical opinion/report decide to undertake termination of pregnancy of the petitioner-victim, necessary measures be also taken for preserving of DNA samples of the fetus. Needless to mention here that the petitioner-victim be provided appropriate free medical facilities in the event termination of pregnancy is undertaken," said Justice Javed Iqbal Wani in the order.
Case Title : Raheela Nazir Vs J&K EDI
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 198
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that an order of appointment with a stipulation that the services are terminable by one month's notice of either side loses its significance when it was not resorted to during the initial period of contract.
Case Title : Amina Begum Vs State of J&K & Ors.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 199
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that unauthorized occupation by the state of an immovable property of its citizens gives recurring cause of action to the aggrieved citizen and therefore, delay and latches cannot come in the way of such citizen to assert his rights before constitutional court.
Elaborating on the application of Doctrine of Waiver and Doctrine of Estoppel to the case at hand the bench explained that state cannot plead adverse possession in respect of the land of its citizens under its unauthorized occupation and the plea of waiver and estoppel is not attracted in such situation.
Case Title: State of J&K through police station Zainapora vs Zia Mustafa and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 200
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court allowed a revision petition of J&K Police in the 2003 Nadimarg massacre case — the verdict means the trial which had abruptly halted more than a decade back can now resume.
Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul ordered the trial court to take all necessary measures for ensuring examination of witnesses by "issuing commission and/or recording" their statements through videoconferencing.
The trial court shall ensure expeditious proceedings so as to conclude the matter at the earliest, said Justice Koul.