M/S Mir Agro Industries vs M/S Chinar Engineering Projects on 17 July, 2026

    0
    5
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench

    M/S Mir Agro Industries vs M/S Chinar Engineering Projects on 17 July, 2026

    Author: Rahul Bharti

    Bench: Rahul Bharti

                                                               Sr. No. 115
                                                               Supp. 1
    
    
    
    
             HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                             AT SRINAGAR
                             CM(M) No. 295/2026
                             CM No. (4425/2026)
    
       M/s Mir Agro Industries
                                                   ...Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
              Through: Mr. Z. A. Qureshi, Sr. Advocate with
                       Mr. Muazzam Nasir, Advocate and
                       Mr. Mian Muzaffar, Advocate
    
                                       VERSUS
       M/s Chinar Engineering Projects
                                                              ...Respondent(s)
              Through:
    
    CORAM:
              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE.
                                   ORDER
    

    17.07.2026

    1. The petitioner as a sole defendant in a civil suit

    SPONSORED

    filed by the respondent is aggrieved of the manner

    in which the Court of the Additional District

    Judge, Srinagar, which is also a Commercial

    Court, Srinagar, has come to exercise its

    jurisdiction leaving the petitioner aggrieved.

    2. The respondent addressed his civil suit to the

    Court of the Principal District Judge, Srinagar.

    3. The cause title of said suit is “Suit for recovery of

    Rs. 98,10,000/- along with interest, damages,

    declaration, permanent prohibitory injunction and
    mandatory injunction, and also to direct the

    defendant to pay the compensation to the tune of

    Rs. 50,00,000/- to the plaintiff, in total the

    defendant has to pay an amount of Rs.

    1,48,10,000/-“.

    4. In the entire plaint, the respondent does not refer

    his suit claim to be born out of a commercial

    transaction so as to render the suit as a suit of

    commercial nature.

    5. Although, entire purported course of transaction

    obtaining between the petitioner and the

    respondent is nothing else but a commercial

    transaction rendering the suit of the respondent

    by its inherent nature a commercial suit but still

    presented before the Principal District Judge,

    Srinagar on the side of its ordinary original civil

    jurisdiction in terms of Civil Courts Act, Svt. 1977

    read with the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

    6. Said suit upon institution before the learned

    Principal District Judge, Srinagar in terms of

    section 29 of the Civil Courts Act, Svt. 1977 came

    to be assigned to the Additional District Judge,
    Srinagar which incidentally by its own authority is

    constituted as a Commercial Court, Srinagar.

    7. If the institution of the civil suit on account of

    being a commercial suit was to take place, then

    the original institution would have taken before

    the Additional District Judge, Srinagar as being a

    Commercial Court, Srinagar, whereas the

    institution took place before the Court of the

    Principal District Judge, Srinagar. Thus, the suit

    was presented as an ordinary civil suit falling

    within the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court of

    the Principal District Judge, Srinagar wherefrom it

    came to be so transferred to the Court of the

    Additional District Judge, Srinagar.

    8. The petitioner, upon appearance in the civil suit,

    came forward with two applications both referable

    to Order 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

    9. In one application, the petitioner came to invoke

    Order 7 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure,

    1908 and, in another application, the petitioner

    came to invoke Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil

    Procedure, 1908.

    10. The Court of the Additional District Judge,

    Srinagar, designated as the Commercial Court,

    Srinagar, has come to decline both applications of

    the petitioner by virtue of an order dated

    07.07.2026.

    11. In fact, the Court of the Additional District

    Judge, Srinagar besides dealing with the two

    applications of the petitioner also dealt with one

    application under section 151 of the Code of Civil

    Procedure, 1908 filed by the respondent.

    12. The Court of learned Additional District Judge,

    Srinagar designated Commercial Court, Srinagar

    came to deal with the petitioner’s application

    under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil

    Procedure, 1908 from para 9 to 21 of the order

    impugned. The learned Court below has come to

    hold that the plaint is not liable to suffer rejection

    and, therefore, application under Order 7 Rule

    11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is

    misconceived and thus dismissed it.

    13. The petitioner’s application under Order 7 Rule

    10 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil
    Procedure, 1908 for seeking return of the plaint

    came to be dealt with from para 22 to 27 of the

    order impugned reaching to a conclusion that even

    this application of the petitioner is misconceived

    and accordingly dismissed the same.

    14. Coming to the respondent’s application under

    section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,

    the Court below came to deal with the same in

    para 28 to 30 of the order impugned by directing

    Tehsildar, Shahoora Litter, Lassipora to supervise

    the suit property on a regular basis till further

    orders from said Court with a further direction

    unto Tehsildar concerned to ensure “no

    construction activity, structural modification,

    movement of machinery, installation of equipment

    or alteration affecting the character of the property

    is undertaken during the subsistence of the suit

    proceedings. For effective compliance, the

    Tehsildar authorized to undertake periodic

    inspections and capture geo-tagged photographs of

    the site on each day clearly depicting the date,

    time and geographical coordinates so that any
    variation in the physical status of the property

    may be objectively verified”.

    15. In fact, read between the lines, Tehsildar

    concerned has been made a watchdog by the

    Court below upon the petitioner with respect to

    the subject matter of the suit.

    16. The petitioner has rushed to this Court invoking

    supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under article

    227 of the Constitution of India. Revisional

    jurisdiction under section 115 of the Code of Civil

    Procedure, 1908 is also equally available at the

    disposal of the petitioner to the extent rejection of

    its application under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the

    Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is concerned.

    17. This Court finds a prima facie case to entertain

    the present petition both for the purpose of

    exercising supervisory jurisdiction under article

    227 of the Constitution of India and also revisional

    jurisdiction under section 115 of the Code of Civil

    Procedure, 1908 to examine the legality and

    legitimacy of exercise of jurisdiction by the Court

    below be it acting as an ordinary Civil Court
    dealing with the civil suit or as a Commercial

    Court.

    18. Issue notice to the respondent.

    19. The petitioner to furnish registered postal cover

    within a period of seven days whereupon notice to

    go to the respondent.

    20. Notice in CM No. 4425/2026 also.

    21. In the meantime, further proceedings in the civil

    suit shall come to stay along with stay of operation

    of the impugned order dated 07.07.2026.

    22. Send for the scanned record of the civil suit No.

    1035/2026 titled “M/s Chinar Engineering

    Projects vs. M/s Mir Agro Industries” from the

    Court of Additional District Judge, Srinagar.

    23. List on 11.08.2026.

    (RAHUL BHARTI)
    JUDGE

    SRINAGAR
    17.07.2026
    Akhil Dev



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here