Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CM(M)/435/2025 of ABID HUSSAIN Vs UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K TH.CHIEF SECRETARY AND ORS on 17 November 2025
No. 13 Regular Cause List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU& KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR [Through Virtual Mode] CM(M) No. 435/2025 Abid Hussain … Petitioner(s) Through: - Mr Hakim Suhail Ishtiaq, Advocate. V/s Union Territory of J&K and Ors. … Respondent(s) Through: - Mr Waseem Gul,
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.
Serial No. 13 Regular Cause List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU& KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
[Through Virtual Mode]
CM(M) No. 435/2025
Abid Hussain … Petitioner(s)
Through: -
Mr Hakim Suhail Ishtiaq, Advocate.
V/s
Union Territory of J&K and Ors. … Respondent(s) Through: - Mr Waseem Gul, Government Advocate with Ms Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE M. A. CHOWDHARY, JUDGE.
(ORDER) 17.11.2025
01. Invoking supervisory jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks a direction to the Court of learned Sub-Judge/ Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar (Executing Court) to execute the Decree dated 16th of October, 2008 passed in a Civil Suit, by virtue of which some directions are stated to have been passed relating to the service conditions of the Petitioner, who is now stated to have attained the age of superannuation.
02. This Court, vide Order dated 10th of October, 2025, had sought a report from the Executing Court with respect to the Execution Petition, pursuant to which the Executing Court has filed the Report, wherein it has been stated that the Respondents, on 25th of August, 2025, have moved an application for dismissal of the Execution Petition for want of jurisdiction, to which Objections stand filed and the same is awaiting disposal.
03. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that till date the arguments have not been heard on the application referred by the Executing Court in its report.
04. Be that as it may, since the Hon’ble Apex Court in a case titled ‘Periyammal (Dead) through LRs and Others v. Rajamani &Anr., Etc.’, reported as ‘2025 LiveLaw (SC) 29’, has held that the Executing Court must dispose of the execution proceedings within six months from the date of filing, which may be extended only by recording reasons in writing for such delay, therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no need to keep this Petition pending any further and that the same can be disposed of in tune with the directions passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
05. Accordingly, the present Petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Executing Court to expedite the hearing of the Execution Petition so as to take the same to its logical end, particularly in the face of the observations made by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforementioned case.
06. Disposed of.
(M. A. CHOWDHARY)
JUDGE SRINAGAR 17h November, 2025 “TAHIR”
Tahir Manzoor Bhat I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document