Lack Of Boundaries In Sale Deed Not Fatal To Title If Plot Number & Parent Title Are Sufficiently Identifiable: Calcutta High Court Terror Perception Of Underworld Justifies Delay In Invoking MCOCA; Purely Civil Disputes Can Metamorphose Into Criminal Offence: Bombay High Court Identical Wills Executed By Spouses On Same Day Not Necessarily 'Mutual Wills' Restricting Power Of Alienation: Delhi High Court Written Notice Not Mandatory For Revoking Permission Under Section 41 Presidency Small Cause Courts Act: Gujarat High Court Wife Cannot Maintain Complaint Against Husband Under Senior Citizens Act; Not Intended For Spousal Disputes: Karnataka High Court Mere Presence At Scene Or Facilitation Without Intent To Aid Crime Does Not Amount To Abetment: Delhi High Court Offences Under IT Act Punishable With 3 Years Imprisonment Are Bailable Under Section 77B: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail In KCA Data Theft Case Premature Release Can't Be Denied Citing Section 435 CrPC If Sentence Under Central Act Is Already Served: Madras High Court Suppression Of Higher Qualification To Secure Job Reserved For Lower Education Is Foundational Fraud, Sympathy Has No Role: Supreme Court MBBS Admissions | Candidate Using NIOS Marks To Meet 50% Eligibility Cannot Claim State Govt School Quota: Orissa High Court High Court Cannot Exercise Article 227 Power To Strike Off Plaint When Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Exists: Madras High Court Section 69 IEA | Onus On Propounder To Lead Secondary Evidence & Remove Suspicious Circumstances If Attesting Witnesses Are Dead: Telangana High Court

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