Jammu and Kashmir High Court
TrP (C)/24/2025 of TARO DEVI Vs KEWAL KRISHAN on 24 April 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU TrP (C) No. 24/2025 CM No. 6025/2025 Taro Devi …..Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Raghubir Singh, Advocate. Vs Kewal Krishan .….Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Lal Chand Sharma, Advocate. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE ORDER
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
TrP (C) No. 24/2025
CM No. 6025/2025
Taro Devi
…..Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Raghubir Singh, Advocate.
Vs
Kewal Krishan
.….Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Lal Chand Sharma, Advocate.
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
(24.04.2026)
1. The respondent-Kewal Krishan came forward with institution of a civil suit in August, 2025 by presenting it before the learned Principal District Judge, Rajouri which then was transferred to the court of Sub Judge, (Special Mobile Magistrate), Rajouri.
2. In his said suit, the sole defendant is the petitioner herein. The subject matter of the suit in which a decree of specific performance is being solicited is a land which is situated in village Kangri, tehsil Beripattan, district Rajouri.
3. It has been stated by Mr. Raghubir Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner-Taro Devi that from the end of the petitioner a civil suit has also been preferred before the court of Munsiff, Sunderbani in which the petitioner is assailing alleged claim of the respondent with respect to the agreement for which specific performance is being solicited against her. Regular List Serial No. 05
2 TrP (C) No. 24/2025
4. The petitioner has come forward with present transfer application seeking transfer of the respondent’s suit to the court of competent jurisdiction in Jammu.
5. It has been stated at the Bar by Mr. Raghubir Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner that from the end of the petitioner a civil suit against the respondent is pending before the court of Munsiff Sunderbani which is said to have suffered dismissal and, therefore, the only litigation which is obtaining between the petitioner and the respondent is civil suit of the respondent against the petitioner before the court of Sub Judge, (Special Mobile Magistrate), Rajouri.
6. This Court finds no good reason for ordering transfer of said civil suit from the court of Sub Judge, (Special Mobile Magistrate), Rajouri to anywhere else, within or outside the District Rajouri, more particularly, when Rajouri is now well connected with rest of India through widened roads and convenient public transport and also the District Court Rajouri has a Bar as good as the one which is in the Jammu district. Therefore, the transfer application is dismissed.
(RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE JAMMU
24.04.2026
Shivalee
Whether the order is speaking :Yes / No
Whether the order is reportable: Yes / No
Shivalee Khajuria 2026.04.27 11:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document