Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Gull Bhat And Others vs Aziz Bhat on 5 April, 2025
S. No. 13
Regular list
HIGH C0URT 0F JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CM(8303/2024) IN CR 3/2016
CM 8304/2024
GULL BHAT AND OTHERS ...Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Mir. Umar, Advocate.
Vs.
AZIZ BHAT ...Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. S. M. Ayoub, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI JUDGE
ORDER
05.04.2025
1. Four applicants herein namely Gull Bhat, Hassan Bhat, Mst Janni
& Bashir Ahmad came to prefer a civil revision before this court
bearing No. CR. 3/2016 thereby challenging an order dated
26.12.2015 read with judgment and decree dated 22.09.2011
passed by the court of Munsiff, Shopian.
2. In the said revision petition, the sole respondent was Aziz Bhat.
3. During the pendency of the said revision petition, the sole
respondent Aziz Bhat came to expire which resulted in an
application being filed for bringing on record legal heirs of
respondent-Aziz Bhat. The application came to be filed on
14.03.2016 wherein it came to be stated that sole respondent-Aziz
Bhat had passed away on 03.03.2012 itself during the time when
the matter was before the court below and that in place of the
deceased respondent his legal heirs need to be brought on record at
the first instance but it defies sense and understanding that why the
applicants despite knowing that Aziz Bhat was dead wayback in the
year 2012 still named him respondent in the revision petition.
4. The revision petition came to suffer dismissal in terms of an order
dated 17.07.2018 for seeking restoration of which applicants came
forward with the restoration application CM No. 5144/2019 which
too came to suffer dismissal in terms of an order dated 22.03.2021.
5. The applicants have now again come forward with two applications
CM Nos. 8303 and 8304 of 2024 thereby seeking not only
condonation of delay but seeking restoration of the restoration
application 5144/2019.
6. Both the applications are retaining Aziz Bhat as non-applicant who
is the dead person way back in 2012 and both the applications are
thus seriously flawed and misconceived which at the very first
instance ought not have been filed by the petitioners and their
counsel.
7. Applications are seriously misconceived and that not only warrant
dismissal but with costs and therefore the applicants are burdened
with costs of Rs. 40,000/- to be deposited with the Registrar
Judicial Srinagar within a period of one month failing which
Registral Judicial Srinagar shall effect recovery of the costs from
the respondents by taking recourse to Section 91 of the Jammu &
Kashmir Land Revenue Act svt. 1996 as arrears of land revenue by
issuing a certificate for the Tehsildar Shopian to carry forward the
recovery of Rs. 40,000/- from the applicants. Since it is the
applicant-Gull Bhat who has ventured to come forward with the
two frivolous applications and, as such the entire costs are to be
burdened upon him and accordingly to be recovered from him.
CM Nos. 8303 and 8304 of 2024 are dismissed.
(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR
05.04.2025.
Hilal Ahmad
[ad_1]
Source link