Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/833/2024 of MOHAMMAD ASHRAF GANIE AND ORS. Vs THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LIMITED AND ORS. on 28 October 2025
No. 24 REGULAR LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 833/2024 CM(2165/2024) CM(4343/2025) MOHAMMAD ASHRAF GANIE & ORS. …Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through: None Vs. THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LTD & ORS. ...Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Heena Baqal,
Serial No. 24
REGULAR LIST
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 833/2024 CM(2165/2024) CM(4343/2025)
MOHAMMAD ASHRAF GANIE & ORS.
…Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through: None
Vs.
THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LTD &
ORS.
...Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Heena Baqal, Adv. vice
Mr. Shafqat Nazir, Advocate
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDE R
28.10.2025
CM No. 4343/2025
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.
1. This is an application by the petitioners seeking permission to deposit an amount in terms of order dated 06.06.2024 and for extension of interim directions.
2. The writ petition came up for consideration before this Court on 22nd April, 2024, when this Court, while issuing notice to the respondents, directed the respondent-Bank not to take any coercive measures against the petitioners, subject to the petitioners depositing an amount of Rs. 10 lacs within a period of two weeks. This order, however, was not complied with.
3. On 6th June, 2024, this Court, taking note of the failure of the petitioners to comply with the order dated 22nd April, 2024, extended the interim protection granted, subject to deposit of a similar amount again, i.e., Rs. 20 lacs in all. Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 29.10.2025
4. More than a year has passed and the said amount has not been deposited. It is only when coercive measures were undertaken by the Bank to recover the amount, that this afterthought application has been made by the petitioners, seeking permission to deposit the amount. The petitioners have not even turned up to appear in the matter.
5. The application, therefore, lacks bonafides and cannot be allowed. The application is thus dismissed.
6. Since the petitioners have failed to comply with the orders of this Court despite availing several opportunities and have decided not to appear in the matter, as such, we are left with no option but to dismiss this petition for non-prosecution. Ordered accordingly.
7. Interim direction, if any, subsisting shall stand vacated.
(SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE
JUDGE
SRINAGAR: 28.10.2025 “ARIF” Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 29.10.2025