Jammu And Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Monthly Digest May 2024

Nominal Index: Jahangir Ahmad Wani Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw 98 Fayaz Ahmed Kaloo Vs Tej Krishan Ganjoo 2024 LiveLaw 99 Ghulam Mohammad Bhat Alias Gull Bhat Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw 100 Abdul Hamid Khandey Vs United India Insurance Company Limited and others 2024 LiveLaw 101 Rupen Patel Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw 102 GHULAM QADIR MIR & OTHERS Vs UT OF J&K 2024 LiveLaw 103 Yaar Mohammad Kataria & anr V/s Union of India & ors 2024 LiveLaw 104 Kunti Devi Vs Neelam Devi 2024 LiveLaw 105 Mohd. Mohd Sharief 2024 LiveLaw 138 Roop Singh Vs Pritam Singh 2024 LiveLaw 139 Khursheed Ahmad Lone v. Union Territory 2024 LiveLaw 140 Qurat-ul-ain Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw 141 Judgments/Orders: Courts Should Respect Subjective Satisfaction Of Detaining Authority To Release Accused On Bail If Backed By Cogent Material: J&K High Court Case Title: Jahangir Ahmad Wani Vs UT Of J&K Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 98 Clarifying the scope of judicial review in preventive detention cases the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court acknowledged that courts generally should respect the "subjective satisfaction" of the detaining authority and its apprehension that the person might get bail, however, this immunity is not absolute. J&K Shariat Act, 2007 Paramount In Nature, Overrides All Customary Laws Within Domain Of Personal Law Matters: High Court Case Title: Ghulam Mohammad Bhat Alias Gull Bhat Vs UT of J&K Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 100 Underscoring the paramount nature of the J&K Shariat Act 2007, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the J&K Muslim Personal Law Application Act, 2007 overrides all customary laws in personal law matters. J&K Land Revenue Act | Financial Commissioner's Suo-Moto Power Conditional On Hearing, Can't Modify Orders Without Giving Opportunity To Parties: High Court Case Title: Mst Khalida Vs Financial Commissioner Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 111 Underlining the Financial Commissioner's power to exercise suo-moto revision in a land dispute case under the J&K Land Revenue Act 1996 the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that while the Commissioner has this authority, it cannot be used to bypass the principles of natural justice, which require a party to be heard before an order affecting their rights is reversed or modified. Shedding light on a much broader application of Order 1 Rule 10 concerning writ petitions a bench of Justices Tashi Rabstan & M A Chowdhary observed, “The Writ Court cannot keep itself confined merely to the litigants appearing before it or on the record available nor will it keep itself confined only to the lis before it, but will also take into account the consequences or the effect which the decision will have or is likely to have on the interests of others who may not be wholly necessary for decision of the issue at hand…Viewed from this angle, the concept of necessary party in a purely Civil Suit and a Writ Petition cannot be one and the same” Civil Courts Must Notify Custodian Evacuees Property When Dealing With Evacuee Land Disputes: J&K High Court Clarifies Case Title: Manzoor Hussain Vs Syed Mohsin Abbas Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 125 Clarifying the legal procedure for disputes concerning evacuee property the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that civil courts must notify the Custodian Evacuees Property when taking cognizance of a civil suit regarding evacuee property.