Serial No. 25 Regular Cause list HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(M) 296/2022 CM (7386/2022)

Caveat 2530/2022 Reserved on : 08.08.2025 Pronounced on :21.08.2025 Mehraj-ud-din Malla (Age 45 Years)

…Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

S/O Nunda Malla R/O Hussipora Tehsil Chadoora District Budgam, Kashmir Through: Mr. Zahid Khan, Advocate Vs.

Mst. Zaina W/O Abdul Samad Mir ...Respondent(s)

R/O Hussipora, Tehsil Chadoora District Budgam, Kashmir Through: Mr. Owais Shafi, Advocate CORAM:

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE.

JUDGMENT

1. Petitioner herein has invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, thereby challenging order passed by the court of Civil Judge Sr. Division Sub-Judge Chadoora (herein after referred as “court”) dated 05.12.2022 passed in miscellaneous application No.

38/M, arising out of the case titled Mst. Zaina V/s Mst. Fazi & others.

Factual Matrix of the Case:

2. The respondent filed a suit for declaration, partition and injunction against the petitioner and others seeking the following reliefs:

a. A decree of Declaration declaring the suit property joint and un-

partitioned between the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 plaintiff being entitled to one half (1/2) share out of the suit scheduled property left behind by their parents being a co-sharer/co-owner with defendant No. 1, by declaring the so called compromise and decree obtained by defendant No. 2 by practising fraud from the Court of Munsiff Budgam in case titled as Mst. Fazi v/s Mst. Zaina and another instituted on 29/08/1969 decreed on 06/09/1969 as null and void and not binding on plaintiff on the grounds pleaded in the suit. Further declaring the subsequent documents/instruments including the said gist deeds and partition deed executed with sole intention to deprive the plaintiff of her due share completely null and void and ineffective or in alternate the said documents/instruments may be declared as null and void to the extent of share of the plaintiff in the suit scheduled property.

b. In the event of allowing prayer (a), a preliminary decree for partition may be passed by appointing as Commissioner directing him to partition the suit scheduled property in between the plaintiff and defendant No.1 by meets and bounds as per the injunctions of Muslim Law.

c. After effecting partition of suit scheduled property a decree for possession be passed in favour of the plaintiff putting her into possession of her exclusive share out of suit property thus partition, and also d. Prohibitory injunction decree may be passed in favour of the plaintiff restraining the defendant from doing or cause to be done any sort of interference into her exclusive share thus received in terms of above referred reliefs.

e. Any other relief, order or direction which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in attending circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants to secure the ends of justice.

3. Petitioner along with other defendants filed their written statements as well as draft issues before the learned Civil Judge Sr. Division Sub-Judge Chadoora. It is stated that the respondent/plaintiff after a period of 10 years of the trial filed an application purportedly under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC for impleadment of State of Jammu and Kashmir through Commissioner Secretary Revenue, Jammu, Deputy Commissioner Budgam, Tehsildar Chadoora, Naib Tehsildar Chadoora and Abdul Majeed Dar, as party defendants in the civil original suit bearing No. 157/numbri of 2010. One of the proposed party defendants namely Abdul Majeed Dar filed his objections to the application objecting to his impleadment, but despite that, he was arrayed as party defendant.

4. The learned Civil Judge Sr. Division Sub-Judge Chadoora has passed an order dated 05.12.2022, the relevant para of which is reproduced as under:

“Applying the above principles to the present case, this Court finds that the Govt. officials