Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CM(M)/394/2026 of MST SAYEEDA Vs MOHD RAFIQ SHAH AND OTHERS on 31 August 2026
No. 64 Supplementary Cause list HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(M) 394/2026 CM 5803/2026 MST SAYEEDA …Appellant(s)/Petitioners(s) Through: Mr. Tariq M. Shah, Advocate Vs. MOHD RAFIQ SHAH AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s) Through: CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH
Serial No. 64
Supplementary Cause list
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CM(M) 394/2026 CM 5803/2026
MST SAYEEDA
…Appellant(s)/Petitioners(s)
Through:
Mr. Tariq M. Shah, Advocate
Vs.
MOHD RAFIQ SHAH AND OTHERS
...Respondent(s)
Through:
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, 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
31.08.2026
1. The case set out by the petitioner is that he instituted a civil suit against the respondents in the court of learned Sub-Judge (Sr. Division) Shopian [„the trial court‟]. Initially, the trial court in terms of order dated 22.10.2025 temporarily restrained the respondents, their agents, representatives or any other person claiming through them, from causing any interference in the subject matter of the suit land measuring 16 Marlas falling under Survey No. 199 (14 Marlas) & Survey No. 200 (2 Marlas) situated at Hergam Tehsil and District Shopian. The said order, however, came to be vacated by the trial court on 16.12.2025. Aggrieved of the vacation of the interim order, he approached learned Principal District Judge, Shopian [“the appellate court”] by way of an appeal on 19.12.2025.
2. The short grievance projected by the petitioner is that notwithstanding the fact that arguments in the appeal came to be heard and matter reserved by the appellate court for orders, the case remained open and undated for a considerable period of time from 21.05.2026 to 08.08.2026 and till date, learned appellate court has neither disposed of the appeal nor passed any order regarding preservation of the suit property.
3. Mr. Tariq M. Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for a while submits that he will be satisfied if appellate court is directed to finally consider the appeal or pass appropriate orders in the application for preservation of the suit land.
4. Having regard to the limited nature of controversy and an innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, present petition is disposed of with a direction to learned appellate court to accord consideration to the appeal preferred by the petitioner against order dated 16.12.2025, whereby interim order passed by the trial court came to be vacated and pass appropriate orders, as per law within a period of three weeks from the date copy of this order is made available.
(RAJESH SEKHRI)
JUDGE
Srinagar: 31.08.2026 Adil Ismail