Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, CJ, HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, J
SATBIR KOUR – Appellant
Versus
S AMARJEET SINGH RAINA – Respondent
ORDER :
Cav No. 307/2025
With the appearance of learned counsel for the cavetor, the Caveat stands discharged.
LPA No. 29/2025 in CM(M) No. 21/2025
1. Through the medium of this Letters Patent Appeal, the appellant has challenged the order dated 20.01.2025 passed by a Vacation Bench in CM(M) No. 21/2025 whereby subject to objections, the petitioner-respondent herein was permitted to stay in his own accommodation at the Ground Floor of House No. 188, Sector-1, Channi Himmat, Jammu, subject to an undertaking, to be submitted before the learned Registrar Judicial of this Court to the extent that he would not interfere in the possession of the respondent- appellant herein at the 1st floor of the same house and that the action of the parties in this regard would be monitored through CCTV, which shall be installed by the petitioner- respondent herein before shifting at the ground floor of the said house. The Vacation Bench also directed the respondent-appellant herein not to create any hurdle for the petitioner-respondent herein in the installation of the CCTV prior to his shifting to the ground floor accommodation and that the petitioner-respondent herein shall also clear all the dues payab
Relief not sought in pleadings should not be granted, as it denies the opposing party the chance to contest, potentially leading to injustice.
Point of Law : Domestic violence – Challenge to interim orders - No bar in entertaining a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution even in orders passed by criminal courts.
The court emphasized the importance of complying with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, particularly Rule 3, Order 39, which mandates the court to give notice of the application for inte....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the existence of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under sec. 29 of the DV Act, 2005 precludes the exercise of writ jurisdiction, and ....
The court ruled that a trial court lacking territorial jurisdiction must return an application under the DV Act for filing in the appropriate court, emphasizing the Act's purpose to ensure justice.
Judicial orders of civil/criminal courts are not subject to writ jurisdiction under Article 226; appeals can only be made against specific orders as defined in the Domestic Violence Act.
The Family Court has jurisdiction to grant relief under the Domestic Violence Act, and its findings cannot be overturned by a Single Judge under Article 227 without a clear jurisdictional error.
Primary obligation under DV Act to provide residence and maintenance to aggrieved wife lies with husband; in-laws not liable for accommodation in self-acquired property where no shared household exis....
The court clarified the balance between the rights of parties in domestic violence cases regarding residence and the conditions under which alternate accommodation must be considered.
The definition of 'status quo' in legal terms encompasses both possession and user of property; alterations to this status trigger violation of court orders under Article 227.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
