Cm No. 849/2026 Res Date Of Order:- ... vs Madan Lal S/O Hari Ram
2026 Latest Caselaw 893 J&K

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Cm No. 849/2026 Res Date Of Order:- ... vs Madan Lal S/O Hari Ram on 18 February, 2026

                                                                                 2026:JKLHC-JMU:418


                                                    Sr.No.149
        HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                         AT JAMMU
CM(M) No. 27/2026
CM No. 849/2026                   Res Date of order:- 18.02.2026
Cav No.117/2026                       Uploaded on:- 18.02.2026

       Pawan Kumar, Age 41 years
       S/O Baru Ram
       R/O Village Haripur Manhasan,
       Tehsil Mandal, District Jammu                             ....Petitioners

                               Through :- Mr. Sarfraz Ahmed Rather, Advocate.

         Versus
  1. Madan Lal S/O Hari Ram
     R/O Village Allora, Tehsil Mandal,
     District Jammu.
  2. Nimo Devi W/O Hans Raj
     R/O Village Haripur Manhasan,
     Tehsil Mandal, District Jammu
                                                                 ....Respondent(s)
                          Through :-          Mr. Narinder Kr. Attri, Adv.

  CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE
                                      ORDER

18.02.2026

With the appearance of Mr. Narinder Kr. Attri, Adv., Cav

No.117/2026 stands discharged.

CM(M) No. 27/2026 & CM No. 849/2026

1. Petitioner, through the medium of this petition, has challenged order

dated 08.01.2026 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge,

Jammu in Civil Appeal No.211/2025, whereby the order dated 30.10.2025

passed by the Court of learned Sub-Judge (Special Railway Magistrate),

Jammu, in the civil suit filed by petitioner has been affirmed, whereby one

sided temporary injunction was granted, resulting allegedly in disturbance of

possession and failure to preserve the subject matter of the suit.

2026:JKLHC-JMU:418

2. After arguing for a while, learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that petitioner shall be satisfied, in case this court passes some directions for

the protection of the suit property, so that no further complicacies are created

by the other side with regard to the suit land.

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1, did not raise any serious

objection to this plea raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in case

the petition is disposed of.

4. With the consensus of the parties, the petition is taken up for final

disposal. On a consideration of the matter, it is found that though the courts'

below, the trial court as well as appellate court had declined the temporary

injunction in favour of the petitioner who was plaintiff/appellant before the

courts below, however, since the parties have been litigating in the suit over

the suit property, as such, it will be in the interest of justice that some order is

passed with regard to the protection of the property.

5. In view of the pleadings, submissions made by learned counsel for

both the sides, the petition is disposed of, at this motion stage, with a direction

that no third party interest shall be created in the suit property, till disposal of

the main suit by the trial court. A copy of this order shall be forwarded to trial

court for record.

6. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly along with connected

application.

                    (                                    )   (M.A. Chowdhary)
Jammu:                                                             Judge
18.02.2026
Raj Kumar