Qalander Lone & Anr vs Imtiyaz Ahmad Mir & Ors on 20 December, 2024

Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench

Qalander Lone & Anr vs Imtiyaz Ahmad Mir & Ors on 20 December, 2024

                                                                Serial No. 39
                                                          Supplementary-1 Cause List

      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                     AT SRINAGAR

                          CM (M) No. 484/2024

Qalander Lone & Anr.
                                                            ... Petitioner(s)
                             Through: -
                       Mr Molvi Aijaz, Advocate.
                                    V/s
Imtiyaz Ahmad Mir & Ors.
                                                          ... Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR JUSTICE M. A. CHOWDHARY, JUDGE.

(ORDER)
20.12.2024

01. The Petitioners, through the medium of this Petition, assert that
a Civil Original Suit titled ‘Imtiyaz Ahmad Mir & Ors. v. Qalander
Lone & Anr.‘ for injunction between the Petitioners and the Respondents
was filed before the Court of learned Civil Judge (Munsiff), Tangdhar,
wherein, after some time, the parties entered into a compromise with
respect to the aforesaid case and agreed to decide the same in terms of a
written compromise entered between them.

02. Mr Molvi Aijaz, the learned Counsel appearing for the
Petitioners, submits that the parties had agreed to enter into compromise
and the terms and conditions of the compromise were reduced into writing,
however, inadvertently, the parties prayed that their case be dismissed in
view of the said compromise and the Trial Court, after recording the
statement of the parties and placing on record the compromise, disposed of
the case in terms of the compromise as dismissed, whereas, the Suit should
have been granted in terms of the compromise by passing a Decree in that
behalf.

03. The learned Counsel further submits that it was a surprise to
the parties when they moved for execution of the Judgment and Decree
passed by the Trial Court, inasmuch as, the Trial Court refused to execute
the Decree on the plea that since the Suit was dismissed, as such, no Decree
had been passed which could be executed.

04. Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners
and after going through the pleadings on record, it is found that the Trial
Court has adopted a novel method in disposing of the case. This is so
because when the parties to a Suit enter into a compromise, that too a
written compromise which is supported by the statement of the parties, and
the compromise, if lawful, then the natural consequence is the disposal of
the Suit by granting the Suit in terms of the compromise followed by
passing of the Decree in the matter. It is apparent on the face of the record
that the Trial Court, in this case, has misdirected itself, while passing the
Judgment and Decree. In such circumstances, the Petitioners herein can
avail the remedy of the provisions of Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of
Civil Procedure (CPC) seeking correction in the Judgment as well as
Decree passed by the Trial Court, so that the compromise can be given
some practicable shape, determining the rights of the parties executable.

05. In view of above, the present Petition shall stand disposed of
with a liberty to the Petitioners herein to move the Trial Court for seeking
correction of the Judgment and Decree and the Trial Court, if approached,
is requested to entertain the application and decide the same in accordance
with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the
date of receipt of certified copy of this Order, of course, after hearing both
the parties.

06. Petition is, thus, disposed of, along with the connected CM.

(M. A. CHOWDHARY)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR
December 20th, 2024
“TAHIR”

Tahir Manzoor Bhat
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this
document