Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CM(M)/319/2022 of MOHAMMAD IRFAN MIR ALIAS BILAL Vs MOHAMMAD SHAFI MIR on 30 December 2022
Supplementary HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(M) No.319/2022 CM No.7679/2022 Mohd.Irfan Mir …. Petitioner(s) Through:Mr.Arif Sikander, Advocate V/s Mohd Shafi Mir …. Respondent(s) Through: None CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
CM(M) No.319/2022 CM No.7679/2022
Mohd.Irfan Mir
…. Petitioner(s) Through:Mr.Arif Sikander, Advocate
V/s
Mohd Shafi Mir
…. Respondent(s) Through: None
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, 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
30.12.2022
1. The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction upon the Civil Judge, Jr. Division Pampore (hereafter for short “the trial court”) to either execute the judgment and decree dated 30.06.2017 passed by the said Court or in the alternative to execute order dated 13.08.2022 passed by the Lok Adalat in a time bound manner. 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction upon the Civil Judge, Jr. Division Pampore (hereafter for short “the trial court”) to either execute the judgment and decree dated 30.06.2017 passed by the said Court or in the alternative to execute order dated 13.08.2022 passed by the Lok Adalat in a time bound manner.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
3. It appears that the petitioner had filed a civil suit against the respondent and the same came to be decreed in terms of judgment dated 30.06.2017 passed by the trial court. Vide the aforesaid judgment and decree, the plaintiff/petitioner was declared to be owner of shop measuring 12x12 (1/2 marla 8 ft) falling under khasra No.1483 situated at Kadlabal Pampore. A decree of possession in respect of aforesaid shop in favour of the plaintiff and against the respondent and the same came to be decreed in terms of judgment dated 30.06.2017 passed by the trial court. Vide the aforesaid judgment and decree, the plaintiff/petitioner was declared to be owner of shop measuring 12x12 (1/2 marla 8 ft) falling under khasra No.1483 situated at Kadlabal Pampore. A decree of possession in respect of aforesaid shop in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant was also passed and the defendant/respondent herein was directed to handover the possession of the suit shop to the plaintiff.
4. Against the aforesaid judgment and decree of the trial court, an appeal came to be filed by the respondent/defendant before the court of Principal District Judge Pulwama. Vide judgment dated 18.11.2020 passed by the said court, the appeal was dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the trial court was upheld. came to be filed by the respondent/defendant before the court of Principal District Judge Pulwama. Vide judgment dated 18.11.2020 passed by the said court, the appeal was dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the trial court was upheld.
5. It seems that the petitioner/plaintiff filed an execution petition for execution of judgment and decree dated 30.06.2017 passed by the trial court before the said court. During the pendency of the said execution petition, a compromise was arrived at between the parties, whereby the plaintiff agreed to relinquish his claim relating to the suit shop and in lieu thereof the defendant agreed to transfer land measuring 12 marlas falling under survey No.1679 situated at Kadlabal Pampore to the plaintiff/petitioner. The compromise was recorded in terms of deed dated 16.07.2022 and the same was produced before the Lok Adalat on 13.08.2022 and an award came to be passed by the Lok Adalat on the basis of the settlement. The petitioner thereafter filed an execution petition before the trial court seeking execution of award of the Lok Adalat, as according to the petitioner, the defendant was resiling from the compromise arrived at before the Lok Adalat.execution of judgment and decree dated 30.06.2017 passed by the trial court before the said court. During the pendency of the said execution petition, a compromise was arrived at between the parties, whereby the plaintiff agreed to relinquish his claim relating to the suit shop and in lieu thereof the defendant agreed to transfer land measuring 12 marlas falling under survey No.1679 situated at Kadlabal Pampore to the plaintiff/petitioner. The compromise was recorded in terms of deed dated 16.07.2022 and the same was produced before the Lok Adalat on 13.08.2022 and an award came to be passed by the Lok Adalat on the basis of the settlement. The petitioner thereafter filed an execution petition before the trial court seeking execution of award of the Lok Adalat, as according to the petitioner, the defendant was resiling from the compromise arrived at before the Lok Adalat.
6. The question that falls for determination in this case is as to which of the two decrees has to be executed, the decree passed by the trial court in the suit on 30.06.2017 or the compromise decree passed by the Lok Adalat on 13.08.2022. The answer to this question is simple. Once the the two decrees has to be executed, the decree passed by the trial court in the suit on 30.06.2017 or the compromise decree passed by the Lok Adalat on 13.08.2022. The answer to this question is simple. Once the award of Lok Adalat was passed, the decree passed by the trial court on 30.06.2017 came to be superseded by the decree passed by the Lok Adalat. In these circumstances, it is the decree passed by the Lok Adalat vide award dated 13.08.2022 which is required to be executed by the trial court.
7. In view of the above, the learned trial court is directed to execute the decree dated 13.08.2022 passed by the Lok Adalat against the defendant/respondent by resorting to all measures available under the code of civil procedure. Since much time has already been lost, the learned trial court would do well to ensure the execution of award passed by the Lok Adalat on 13.08.2022 within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before the trial court.decree dated 13.08.2022 passed by the Lok Adalat against the defendant/respondent by resorting to all measures available under the code of civil procedure. Since much time has already been lost, the learned trial court would do well to ensure the execution of award passed by the Lok Adalat on 13.08.2022 within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before the trial court.
8. Petition stands disposed of.
9. Copy of this order be sent to the Executing Court.
SRINAGAR30.12.2022Sarveeda Nissar
(SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE
Whether the order is speaking: Yes/NoWhether the order is reportable: Yes/No