Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

Trial Court's Extension of Status Quo to Protect Worship Rights Deemed Justified: J&K HC

02 October 2024 8:13 PM

By: sayum


Jammu & Kashmir High Court dismissed the petitions in Ghulam Rasool Chaku & Ors. vs. Ishwar Ashram Trust, affirming an interim order allowing devotees to offer prayers at a temple on disputed land. The court ruled that maintaining status quo was necessary to protect the rights of devotees until the final resolution of the ongoing property dispute.

The property in question, measuring approximately 8 kanals, located at Gupt Ganga Nishat Srinagar, was the subject of multiple suits between the petitioners, Ghulam Rasool Chaku & Ors., and the respondent, Ishwar Ashram Trust. The petitioners claimed ownership, while the respondent trust argued that the land was donated to it by Smt. Kamla Devi, who had constructed a temple on the land.

The trial court, in 1997, had declared the petitioners as owners, but the respondent trust challenged this through multiple suits. After a prolonged legal battle, in 2013, the High Court had ordered the consolidation of suits and directed both parties to maintain status quo, allowing devotees to continue offering prayers at the temple.

The petitioners challenged the ex parte order passed by the trial court on December 30, 2013, which extended the status quo order, arguing that it was passed without hearing their side and that there was no temple on the property at the time of acquisition.

The key issue was whether the trial court’s ex parte order extending the status quo was valid, especially since the applications for similar relief were still pending before the court. The petitioners argued that the interim order was passed without due consideration and should not have been extended without hearing them.

The respondent trust, on the other hand, argued that the temple on the disputed land had historical significance and that the rights of devotees to offer prayers should be protected until the matter was fully adjudicated.

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court, presided by Justice Sanjay Dhar, dismissed the petitioners’ challenge. The court found that the trial court’s order extending the interim arrangement was neither illegal nor perverse. The High Court emphasized that the trial court’s discretion in protecting the subject matter of the dispute, including the rights of devotees, was justified, especially in the absence of a decision on the pending interim applications.

The court noted that while there were conflicting claims regarding the construction of the temple, the existence of the temple on the disputed land was not in question. Thus, the status quo needed to be maintained to prevent any disruption to religious practices.

The High Court upheld the status quo order, allowing devotees to continue offering prayers at the temple and directed the trial court to expedite the hearing on the interim injunction applications. The court also dismissed the contempt petition related to the case.

Date of Decision: September 26, 2024

Ghulam Rasool Chaku & Ors. vs. Ishwar Ashram Trust​.

Similar News