MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

J&K High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Sets Aside ‘Manifestly Unjust’ Order, Stresses Code of Civil Procedure ‘Not a Penal Law to Punish’”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgement, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has set aside an order from the Court of Special Mobile Magistrate, Anantnag, terming it ‘manifestly unjust.’ The petitioner, Mst. Raja, had invoked Article 227 of the Constitution, seeking to quash the original order dated 11.12.2015 related to a property dispute and alleged fraudulent compromise decree.

The High Court’s judgement, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, emphasized that the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) exists to “facilitate justice” and is not a “penal law to punish a person.” Justice Wani stated, “It is settled law that provisions of Code of Civil Procedure are designated to facilitate justice… The Scheme of the code in essence is complete adjudication of the dispute between the parties and to do the full justice to the case.”

The case involved a long-standing property dispute, where Mst. Raja claimed she was deprived of her share in her father’s estate due to a fraudulent compromise decree. After several legal battles in lower courts, the High Court observed that the trial court’s dismissal of her application was “manifestly causing failure of justice,” thereby warranting the exercise of “Supervisory Jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.”

The matter has been remanded back to the trial court for reconsideration in light of the High Court’s observations.

Date of Decision:  25.08.2023

Mst. Raja vs Mst. Fazi and Ors.      

Latest Legal News