Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CCP(S)/194/2026 of M/S SHAH ELECTRICALS Vs NARINDER KUMAR AND OTHERS (ROADS AND BUILDINGS) on 29 June 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(S) 194/2026 in [WP(C) 3221/2025]. M/s Shah Electricals. …Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Aushaq Hussain Shah, Advocate. VERSUS Narinder Kumar And Others. …Respondent(s) Through: None. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CCP(S) 194/2026 in [WP(C) 3221/2025].
M/s Shah Electricals.
…Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through:
Mr. Aushaq Hussain Shah, Advocate.
VERSUS
Narinder Kumar And Others.
…Respondent(s)
Through:
None.
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
29.06.2026
01. The petitioner filed writ petition- WP(C) No. 3221/2025 which came to be disposed of without adjudication on merits with a direction to the writ respondents, who were six in number, to consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law and take a decision thereon within a period of two months, preferably from the date of certified copy of the order being made available to all the writ respondents by the petitioner.
02. The claim in the writ petition was a purported contractual claim for payment of an amount of Rs. 4,42,785/- for the work done liability in terms of a contract allotment dated 27.01.2021.
03. The petitioner seems to have not done his part of the duty mandated in terms of service of the writ respondents with 08 Regular
certified copy of the order and, therefore, coming forward with the present contempt petition is nothing but premature to the extent of amounting to an abuse of the process of law for which this Court is excusing the petitioner from the burden of exemplary costs.
04. The contempt petition is allowed to be withdrawn, leaving the petitioner to carry out the due compliance of the direction mandated upon him first and thereafter wait for the cause of action to mature to come up with the contempt petition.
05. Accordingly, the contempt petition- CCP(S) No. 194/2026 stands dismissed as withdrawn.
(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR 29.06.2026 Bisma Jan.