Attar Hussain vs Sain Mohd. And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 850 j&K

                                                          S. No. 222
      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                      AT JAMMU

                                                    CPC No. 05/2013

Attar Hussain                                                ...Petitioner(s)

                               Through :- None.

      V/s

Sain Mohd. and ors.                                        ...Respondent(s)

                                Through :- None.


Coram:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE

                                ORDER

1. The instant contempt petition is pending since 2013. Respondent Nos.

3 to 5 despite service have chosen not to appear on the last date of hearing

and even today as well.

2. Respondent No. 6 has not been served.

3. Be that as it is, the perusal of the contempt petition reveals that the

violation of order dated 22.02.2013 is alleged in the instant contempt

petition whereunder this Court issued post-admission notice to the contesting

respondents in appeal and in the application for interim relief being CM No.

35/2010 while disposing of the same provided that operation of both

judgments/decrees questioned in the appeal shall remain stayed.

4. In the memo of appeal respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are in the instant

petition impleaded as respondents. There is no other respondent impleaded

in the appeal who have been impleaded in the instant contempt petition as

respondent Nos. 3 to 6.

5. It is alleged in the contempt petition that on 16.05.2013 respondent

Nos. 1 to 3 came along with 10 to 15 persons whose identity according to

the petitioner could not be ascertained in the late dead night and started

cutting the whole wheat crop while trespassing into the land in dispute.

6. It is alleged by the petitioner that the incident was reported to

respondent No. 4 herein and sought police assistance, so that there is no

breach of peace and that order of this Court dated 22.02.2013 is enforced. It

is contended that respondent No. 4 deputed some officials who alleged

respondent No. 1 to cut the crop on the condition that the same will be kept

in the Superdari of Halqa Panch. It is being alleged that the crop, however,

was not kept under Superdari and the petitioner was informed that there was

no stay order operating, which requires the crop to be kept at Superdari. It is

thus, alleged that the respondents had violated the Court order deliberately

and intentionally despite knowing the fact that the judgment and decree of

the lower court was stayed in terms of order dated 22.02.2013.

7. The fact remains that this Court passed an order dated 22.03.2013 in

the application for interim relief accompanying the appeal, staying the

judgment and decree of the courts below. The fact also remains that no order

whatsoever has been passed by this Court, which required the parties to

maintain the position as it existed on the day of the passing of the order by

this Court on sport.

8. Fact also remains that respondent Nos. 3 to 6 are strangers to the

proceedings in the contempt petition. The said respondents are not parties

impleaded in the main appeal.

9. Having regard to the aforesaid position, this Court is of the opinion

that the contempt petition is misconceived in law and proceedings, as such,

are liable to be closed. Ordered accordingly.

10. The contempt petition is dismissed.

(JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE

Jammu 10.08.2021 Angita