Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup October 28 - November 3, 2024

J&K State Forest Corporation Vs Sher Singh 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 291

Ram Prasad Vs New India Assurance Co Ltd 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 292

Kuldeep Raj Dubey Vs Puneet Sharma 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 293

Imran Khan Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 294

Roshan Kumar Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 295

Chowdhary Piara Singh Vs Sat Pal 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 296

Judgments/Orders:

Objections To Pecuniary Jurisdiction Must Be Raised Early In Trial, Else Would Be Barred In Appeal Unless Failure of Justice Occurs: J&K High Court

Case Title: J&K State Forest Corporation Vs Sher Singh

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 291

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that objections concerning the pecuniary limits of a court's jurisdiction must be raised at the earliest opportunity in the trial court. If not, they cannot be entertained by appellate or revisional courts, unless the oversight caused a failure of justice, as prescribed under Section 21 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the court elucidated.

Failure To Apply Statutes And Binding Precedents Constitutes Error Reviewable Under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ram Prasad Vs New India Assurance Co Ltd

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 292

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that the failure to apply statutes and binding precedents constitutes a palpable legal flaw warranting review under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

A bench of Justice M.A Chowdhary clarified that courts must adhere to applicable statutes and precedents, especially those laid down by the Supreme Court, to ensure judgments are free from errors.

"Attempt To Wreak Vengeance, Divert From Core Issues": J&K High Court Quashes Defamation Complaint

Case Title: Kuldeep Raj Dubey Vs Puneet Sharma

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 293

Quashing a defamation complaint, citing the improper use of judicial processes for personal vendetta the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court highlighted that judicial mechanisms cannot be exploited to satisfy personal egos or to pursue vengeance.

Arbitrarily Labelling Individuals As Habitual Offenders Not Only Taints Them But Also Impairs Their Fundamental Rights: J&K High Court

Case Title: Imran Khan Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 294

Quashing the police action of branding a Jammu resident as a history-sheeter and entering his name in the Surveillance Register the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court underscored that the arbitrary labeling of individuals as habitual offenders without due process not only taints their image but also impairs their fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Unexplained & Unsatisfactory Delay In Executing Detention Order Raises Doubts About Detaining Authority's Subjective Satisfaction: J&K High Court

Case Title: Roshan Kumar Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 295

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court quashed a preventive detention order observing that the unexplained and unsatisfactory delay in executing the detention order raised doubts about the genuineness of the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction.

S.139 NI Act | Once Complainant Proves That Cheque Was Issued By Accused To Discharge Debt, Burden Shifts On Accused: J&K High Court

Case Title: Chowdhary Piara Singh Vs Sat Pal

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 296

Spotlighting the critical shift in evidentiary burden under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that once the complainant proves that a cheque was issued by the accused to discharge a debt, Section 139 mandates that the burden of proof shifts to the accused.