{"id":33542,"date":"2005-02-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-02-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005"},"modified":"2016-01-08T07:06:39","modified_gmt":"2016-01-08T01:36:39","slug":"high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005","title":{"rendered":"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At … vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"
Jammu High Court<\/div>\n
High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At … vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n \n HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR            \nC.Rev. 140 of 1999\nTariq Hameed Kara  \n  petitioner\nGhulam Mohi-ud-din Wani & Ors.  \n   respondent\n!Mr.Z.A.Qureshi, Advocate\n^Mr.M.H.Attar, Advocate \n\nThe Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hakim Imtiyaz Hussain \nDate: 07\/02\/2005 \n: J U D G M E N T :\n<\/pre>\n
                The question involved in the case is as to ‘whether the
\njurisdiction of a Civil
\nCourt is excluded to grant injunction in respect of evacuee property in a suit
\nfiled by an
\nallottee against private persons.’
\n              Tariq Hamid Kara legal heir of Kaukab Jabeen W\/o Lt. Ab. Hameed
\nKarra
\n(Advocate) R\/o Shivpora, Srinagar  has filed this revision petition against the
\norder of City
\nMunsiff Srinagar dated 02-08-1999 passed on file no. 647\/Numberi titled Tariq
\nHameed
\nKarra vs. Ghulam Mohi-ud-din Wani and Ors.\n<\/p>\n
                The facts relevant for the disposal of the present petition are that
\nTariq
\nHameed Karra petitioner herein filed a suit for perpetual injunction against Gh.
\nMohi-ud-\n<\/p>\n
din Wani & Ors. (respondents). The matter relates to land which has been fully
\ndescribed
\nin the plaint before the Civil Court. The land is  evacuee land and therefore
\nunder the
\nmanagement of Custodian, Kashmir. The petitioner claims to be the legal heirs of
\nthe
\noriginal owners-evacuees and, therefore, by means of separate proceedings the
\nland has
\nbeen duly allotted by the Custodian Kashmir in his favour. There is no dispute
\nover these
\nfacts. By means of the  allotment the petitioner has come into possession of the
\nsuit land.\n<\/p>\n
He is enjoying the fruits of the property and is looking after it. It is alleged
\nby him that
\ndefendants-respondents, who are the residents of Shivpora for one reason or the
\nother are
\ntrying to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the suit
\nproperty. He has
\ntherefore, prayed for a decree of perpetual injunction restraining the
\nrespondents from
\ninterfering in the possession of the petitioner over the suit property.\n<\/p>\n
        The respondents appeared before the trial Court and raised the plea that
\nthe suit
\nproperty being evacuee property Civil Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit
\nas the same
\nwas hit by Section 31 of J&K Evacuee (Administration of Property) Act. The trial
\nCourt
\non consideration of the matter agreed with the plea raised by the respondents
\nand held that
\nthe Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. It accordingly dismissed the suit
\nby means of
\nthe impugned order. The court observed as under:-\n<\/p>\n
                “Accordingly in view of the above discussion and the facts and
\ncircumstances of the case and in the light of the case law referred by the
\ncounsel for the respective parties, the suit is hit by provisions of Section 31
\nof the Evacuee Administration of Property Act. This court has no
\njurisdiction to try the suit, the suit is accordingly dismissed. The order
\npassed in the temporary injunction application on 24.2.1999 stands vacated.
\nHowever, the plaintiff shall be at liberty to take other appropriate action as
\nmay be permissible under law before the appropriate forum. No order as to
\ncosts. The file is accordingly disposed off, after due completion, the same
\nshall go to records.”\n<\/p>\n
        Aggrieved by the said order the present petition has been filed with the
\nprayer that the main suit does not fall within the provisions of the J&K Evacuee
\n(Administration of Property) Act as such the court had the jurisdiction and by
\nholding otherwise the trial court has failed to exercise jurisdiction so vested
\nin it and
\nhas therefore, caused failure of justice.\n<\/p>\n
                   Heard.\n<\/p>\n
                The only point raised by the Ld. Counsel for the respondents to
\ncontest the present revision petition is that the Civil Court in view of the
\nprovisions
\nof Sections 15 and 31 of the J&K Evacuee Administration of Property Act (for
\nshort
\nthe Act) does not have the jurisdiction to grant injunction in respect of the
\nproperty
\nwhich falls within the definition of Evacuee Property under the Act. In this
\nbehalf
\nhe has referred two authorities of this Court cited as Karan Singh  v. Sushila
\nRajpoot<\/a>  1997KLJ 62 and Satpal  v. Chanak Ram 1993 SLJ368.\n<\/p>\n
                 Section 15 of the Act provides as under:-
\n Exemption from attachment, sale, etc._(1) No property which has
\nvested in the Custodian shall be liable to attachment, distress or sale in
\nexecution of a decree of a. order of a Court or of any other authority],
\nand no injunction in respect of any b.such property shall be granted by
\nany Court or other authority.\n<\/p>\n
 (2) Any attachment or injunction subsisting on the commencement of
\nthis Act in respect of any evacuee property which has vested in the
\nCustodian shall cease to have effect on such commencement, and any
\ntransfer of such property under the orders of a Court or any other
\nauthority made after such date as may be specified in this behalf by the
\nGovernment by notification in the Jammu & Kashmir Government
\nGazette, shall be set aside if an application is made to such Court or
\nauthority by or at the instance of the Custodian within three months
\nfrom the commencement of this Act.”\n<\/p>\n
        This section according to the Ld. Counsel for the respondents ousts
\nthe jurisdiction of Civil Court and exempts the evacuee property from
\nattachment, distress or sale and execution of decree and specifically provides
\nthat no injunction in respect of any such property shall be granted by any
\ncourt or other authority.\n<\/p>\n
       Section 31 bars the jurisdiction of Civil Court in certain matter. It
\nprovides:-\n<\/p>\n
1)      “save as otherwise expressly provide in this Act, no Civil Court shall
\nhave jurisdiction___\n<\/p>\n
i)      to entertain or adjudicate upon any question whether any property is
\nor is not evacuee property or whether any evacuee has or has not any
\ninterest in any evacuee property.\n<\/p>\n
ii)     To question the legality of any action taken by Custodian General or
\nthe Custodian under this Act.\n<\/p>\n
iii)    In respect of any matter which the Custodian General or the
\nCustodian is empowered by or under this act to determine.”\n<\/p>\n
            Under Section 31 therefore, the jurisdiction of Civil Court is
\nbarred in
\nthe following matters:\n<\/p>\n
a)      to entertain or adjudicate upon any question whether any property is or is
\nnot evacuee property or whether any evacuee has or has not any interest
\nin any evacuee property;\n<\/p>\n
b)      whether an evacuee has or has not any right or interest in any evacuee
\nproperty;\n<\/p>\n
c)      to question the legality of any action taken by the Custodian General or
\nthe Custodian under the Act;\n<\/p>\n
d)      in respect of any matter which the (Custodian General or the Custodian)
\nis empowered by or under the Act to determine.\n<\/p>\n
               This provision, as is clear from its plain language provides that
\nwhen any
\naction is required to be taken by the Custodian or Custodian General under the
\nAct
\nthe legality of such a question cannot be challenged before a Civil Court nor
\ncan the
\nCivil Court decide regarding any right in respect of evacuee property as the
\nquestions as to whether the property is or is not an evacuee property is
\nrequired to be
\ndecided, under the Act, by the authorities only. The scheme of the Act however,
\nshows that while the authorities under the Act have got powers to deal with and
\ndetermine certain issues including the questions regarding the nature of
\nproperty, the
\nauthorities have got no powers to grant or refuse injunction to preserve or
\nprotect the
\nproperty, against a private party.\n<\/p>\n
                This section, therefore, bars jurisdiction of a Civil Court only in
\nmatters
\nwhich are specifically mentioned in the Section. Adjudication of matters falling
\nbeyond this Section will definitely fall within the jurisdiction of Civil Court.\n<\/p>\n
                Ld. Counsel for the respondents has taken resort to Section 15 which
\naccording to him, excludes the jurisdiction of Civil Court in respect of
\nattachment,
\ndistress or sale and execution of decree. The Ld. Counsel referring to the word
\ninjunction, would argue that since no injunction could be passed under the said
\nsection, a suit for perpetual injunction would not lie before a Civil Court .
\nThe
\nargument of the Ld. Counsel is devoid of any merit. A conjoint  reading of
\nSection
\n15 and 31 bars the jurisdiction of Civil Court only in matters which fall within
\nthe
\ncompetence of Custodian or the Custodian General. Similarly Section 15 on the
\nother hand bars the grant of remedy in certain cases not the jurisdiction. It
\nnowhere
\nbars the jurisdiction of civil Court but exempts the Evacuee property from
\nattachment, distress, sale or injunction. Exemption of the property does not
\namount
\nto exclusion of jurisdiction of the civil Court.\n<\/p>\n
                The suit before the trial Court is a civil suit between private
\nindividuals
\nwhere neither the order passed by the authorities under the Act nor any issue
\nrelating
\nto the exercise of jurisdiction by these authorities is involved.  It will by no
\nstretch of
\nimagination fall either within section 15 or Section 31 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
                The authorities relied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the respondents
\nalso
\ncannot support him on the ground that the points in issue in both the
\nauthorities were
\nentirely different from the one raised in the present case. In  Karan Singh v.
\nSushila<\/a>
\n(supra) the Court was dealing with the issue of raising new structures on
\nevacuee
\nproperty, the Court held:-\n<\/p>\n
 “power to make alteration in evacuee property or raising new structures
\nare vested in the Custodian in terms of Section 9 of Evacuee
\nAdministration of Property Act. As such Civil Court has no jurisdiction
\nand its jurisdiction is barred under Section 9 of CPC. The facts of the case
\nare that the plaintiff of that case has filed a suit for permanent prohibitory
\ninjunction against the defendants restraining them from interfering in
\nconstruction of stairs and bath rooms in a house which admittedly an
\nevacuee property. The trial court has framed the issues and one issue
\nframed was whether court has no jurisdiction try the suit. The trial Court
\nhas decided the issue in favour of plaintiff but the Hon’ble High Court in
\nthe revision petition has quashed the order and has held that the Civil
\nCourt has no jurisdiction in view of the provisions of Evacuee
\nAdministration of Property Act to try the suit.”\n<\/p>\n
             Similalrly in Satpal v. Janak Ram (supra) the plaintiff had raised
\ncomplicated questions regarding the right of the parties over the property. He
\nhad
\nalleged that his father and father of the defendants were displaced persons who
\nwere
\nallotted two separate pieces of land out of the evacuee land and by mutual
\nconsent
\nboth of them had exchanged their respective portion of land. Later when the
\ndispute
\narose the defendants denied the exchange of allotted land.  In view of the
\nissues
\ninvolved it was held that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to try the case
\nu\/s 31 of
\nthe Evacuee (Administration of Property)Act.\n<\/p>\n
                 Law relating to exclusion of the jurisdiction of Civil Court to
\nhear
\ncases of civil nature is now settled by the Apex Court by catena of authorities.
\nIn
\nDhualbai v. State of M.P AIR 1969 SC 78 the Apex Court held that an exclusion of
\nthe jurisdiction of the civil Court is not readily to be inferred. The Court
\nfurther
\nobserved that where there is no express exclusion of the jurisdiction of the
\nCivil
\nCourt the examination of the remedies and the scheme of the particular Act to
\nfind
\nout the intendment becomes necessary and the result of the inquiry may be
\ndecisive.\n<\/p>\n
It is necessary to see if the statute creates a special right or a liability and
\nprovides
\nfor the determination of the right or liability and further lays down that all
\nquestions
\nabout the said right and liability shall be determined by the tribunals so
\nconstituted,
\nand whether remedies normally associated with actions in civil courts are
\nprescribed
\nby the said statute or not.\n<\/p>\n
                In Dwarka Prasad Agarwal v.Ramesh Chandra Agarwala AIR 2003
\nSC 2696 , the Apex Court observed as under:-
\n ” The dispute between the parties was eminently a civil dispute and not a
\ndispute
\nunder the provisions of the Companies Act. Section 9 of the Code of Civil
\nProcedure confers jurisdiction upon the civil Courts to determine all disputes
\nof
\ncivil nature unless the same is barred under a statute either expressly or by
\nnecessary implication. Bar of jurisdiction of a civil Court is not to be readily
\ninferred. A provision seeking to bar jurisdiction of civil Court requires strict
\ninterpretation. The Court, it is well-settled, would normally lean in favour of
\nconstruction, which would uphold retention of jurisdiction of the civil court.
\nThe
\nburden of proof in this behalf shall be on the party who asserts that the civil
\nCourt’s
\njurisdiction is ousted. (see Sahebgouda (dead) by LRs. And others v. Ogeppa and
\nothers<\/a> (2003 (3) SC 13). Even otherwise, the civil court’s jurisdiction is not
\ncompletely ousted under the Companies Act, 1956.”\n<\/p>\n
               Similar observations were made in Sahebgouda  v. Ogeppa<\/a> 2003 (3)
\nSCC 13.\n<\/p>\n
                    A careful perusal of the provisions of Sections 15 & 31 of
\nthe Act,
\nrelied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the respondents shows that the jurisdiction
\nof the
\nCivil Court to hear a suit of injunction interse private parties is nowhere
\nexpressly
\nbarred.\n<\/p>\n
                 Another important test to determine as to whether the
\njurisdiction of a
\ncivil Court is excluded under the provisions of a special Act is to see as to
\nwhether
\nthe Act provides for the alternate forum and remedy. The Act does not provide
\nany
\nmechanism or remedy where a private party threatens to invade the right of the
\nallottee over the property. If argument of  exclusion of civil courts
\njurisdiction in all
\nmatters under the Act is accepted, it will left an allottee with no remedy in
\ncase its
\npossession over the Evacuee property is interfered with by a private party.\n<\/p>\n
                In view of this legal position the jurisdiction of Civil Court
\ncannot be taken
\nto have been excluded by the provisions of the Act in cases where an allottee
\nclaims
\na relief of an injunction from a civil court if his possession over the property
\nis
\ninterfered with by a private party.\n<\/p>\n
                The present revision petition is, therefore, accepted, the impugned
\norder is
\nset aside .\n<\/p>\n
            Order accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
      Let the parties appear before trial Court on 3.3.2005.<\/p>\n
\nSrinagar\n                       02.2005                       (Hakim Imtiyaz Hussain)\n                                                      Judge\nMujtaba \n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Jammu High Court High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At … vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR C.Rev. 140 of 1999 Tariq Hameed Kara petitioner Ghulam Mohi-ud-din Wani & Ors. respondent !Mr.Z.A.Qureshi, Advocate ^Mr.M.H.Attar, Advocate The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hakim Imtiyaz Hussain Date: […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-33542","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jammu-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nHigh Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At ... vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At ... vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-02-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-08T01:36:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At … vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-02-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-08T01:36:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005\"},\"wordCount\":2337,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jammu High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005\",\"name\":\"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At ... vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-02-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-08T01:36:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At … vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At ... vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At ... vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-02-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-08T01:36:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At … vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005","datePublished":"2005-02-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-08T01:36:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005"},"wordCount":2337,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jammu High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005","name":"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At ... vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-02-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-08T01:36:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/high-court-of-jammu-kashmir-at-vs-ghulam-mohi-ud-din-wani-and-ors-on-7-february-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir At … vs Ghulam Mohi-Ud-Din Wani And Ors on 7 February, 2005"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33542","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=33542"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33542\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33542"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33542"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33542"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}