M. D. Trading Company vs Mohammad Azeem Wani
2026 Latest Caselaw 567 J&K/2

Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench

M. D. Trading Company vs Mohammad Azeem Wani on 10 February, 2026

Author: Rahul Bharti

Bench: Rahul Bharti

                                                                172
                                                                Suppl-I



             HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                             AT SRINAGAR
                                  CR 3/2026 CM(510/2026)
                                      Caveat 93/2026.

         M. D. TRADING COMPANY.
                                                                  ...Petitioner(s)
               Through:     Mr. Mir Umar, Advocate.

                                           VERSUS
         MOHAMMAD AZEEM WANI.
                                                               ...Respondent(s)
               Through:     Mr. Suhail Shahbaz, Advocate for caveator.

    CORAM:
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE.
                                      ORDER

10.02.2026

01. The petitioner has suffered a money decree in a summary

suit preferred by the respondent.

02. The money decree dated 14.10.2024 has been passed by

the Court of 3rd Additional District Judge, Srinagar.

03. In terms of the decree, the respondent has been held entitled

to recover Rs. 26.50 lacs along with interest at the rate of 6% per

annum with effect from the date of filing of the suit.

04. The petitioner had defaulted in causing appearance in

response to the summons and also failed to seek leave to defend the

suit which resulted in the passing of the decree.

05. Against the decree, the petitioner filed an application under

Order 37 rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which was

rejected by virtue of an impugned order dated 31.12.2025 passed on

File No. 38/Misc.

06. The petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court under

Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

07. Issue notice to the respondent.

08. Notice is accepted by the respondent through their counsel

by Mr. Suhail Shahbaz, learned Advocate who is on caveat.

09. Notice in CM No. 510/2026 also.

10. This Court makes it clear that the mere pendency of the civil

revision shall not be reckoned as a stay of the execution proceedings

pending before the executing court relatable to the decree dated

14.10.2024.

11. List on 27th March, 2026.

(RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE

SRINAGAR 10.02.2026 Bisma Jan.