Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : I(1989)ACC323,AIR1989J& K7
ORDERA.S. Anand, C.J.1. Through the medium of these two petitions the petitioners seek transfer of their claim petitions pending with the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Srinagar to its counterpart at Jammu, principally on the ground of the convenience of the parties, though the accident out of which the claim petitions arose allegedly occurred near Qazigund in Kashmir province. The respondents have submitted in writing that they have no objection to the transfer of the petitions from the tribunal at Srinagar to the tribunal at Jammu. Ordinarily, the agreement of the parties should have sufficed to transfer the claim petitions from Srinagar to Jammu but the question is not whether there are grounds to grant the petitioners' prayer but one of its permissibility in law and that controversy in turn would require determination of whether the High Court hasthe power to transfer a claim petition, from one claims tribunal to another in the State.2. The power to transfer civil cases is provid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : AIR1988J& K73
1. This is an appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent for setting aside the judgment dated 4th June, 1987 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court whereby C.M.P. No. 259/87 was dismissed.2. It appears that defendant had filed an application for framing of an additional issue which according to the defendant should have been framed in the following manner :'Whether defendant No. 1 is a debtor and agriculturist and as such this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the question'3. This application was resisted before the learned single Judge and the learned single Judge relying on Section 2(1) of the J. and K. Debtors Relief Act of 1976 dismissed the application of the defendant for framing an additional issue and held that the lis pending before it was not covered by the Debtors Relief Act of 1976, therefore framing of issue was not required.4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.5. Mr. Mahajan appearing for the other side contended before us that the debt was not c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 1988CriLJ1500
ORDERR.P. Sethi, J.1. Peer Hissam-ud-din who is alleged to be notorious and staunch worker of MUF was detained vide detention order No. 218 dt. 8-6-1987 passed by the respondent No. 2. It was alleged that being an Advocate, the detenu remained active in creating contempt against Union of India by openly challenging the accession of the Jammu and Kashmir with Union of India. He is further alleged to have created disaffection among various classes of people living in the State. Vide Annexure A being the grounds of detention, the District Magistrate, Baramulla, after levelling general allegations, informed the petitioner to the following effect:Quoting the instances of recent riots in Meerut you have been responsible to arrange communal riots in the State and delivered speeches on the following days at various places in Sopore town and adjacent areas.On 11-2-1987 in a meeting held at Jamia Qadeem Sopore you said that today is the day of Mohd Maqbool Bhat who has been sentenced to death un...
Tag this Judgment!