Ghulam Mohammad Sheikh And vs Ali Mohammad Sheikh on 23 February, 2026

Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench

Ghulam Mohammad Sheikh And vs Ali Mohammad Sheikh on 23 February, 2026

Author: Rahul Bharti

Bench: Rahul Bharti

                                             Serial No.04
                                          REGULAR CAUSE LIST


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                    AT SRINAGAR

                CM(M) 34/2026 CM(397/2026)


Ghulam Mohammad Sheikh and                        ...Petitioner(s)
Another

Through:   Mr. Younis Ahad, Advocate


                               Vs.


Ali Mohammad Sheikh                               ...Respondent(s)

Through:


CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
                             ORDER

23.02.2026

1. The two petitioners are defendants in a civil suit

preferred by the respondent-Ali Mohammad Sheikh

before the Court of learned Sub Judge, Pulwama.

2. The trial court of learned Sub Judge, Pulwama,

by virtue of an order dated 13.08.2025, has disposed

of an application for temporary injunction thereby

making absolute the interim direction of status quo

given in terms of order dated 01.07.2025.

3. The petitioners, being aggrieved of said status

quo direction placed upon them in the context of their

construction intended at the site preferred a civil
miscellaneous appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 before the appellate

court of the learned Principal District Judge,

Pulwama, which by virtue of an order dated

10.11.2025, has dismissed said appeal of the

petitioners by holding the order of the trial court to be

meeting the requirements of law, which being prima

facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable

injury.

4. The petitioners are now taking a chance through

the medium of this petition under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India with respect to the adjudication

so made by the two courts below.

5. This Court, in terms of order dated 06.02.2026,

called upon the learned counsel for the petitioners to

place on record the photographs of the offending

construction which came to be halted by the

intervention of the status quo vis-à-vis the adjoining

building of the respondent.

6. The petitioners have come forward with the

requisite photographs which by no stretch of

imagination can be said to be the photographs of the

site in reference in the context of the building
construction intended by the petitioners vis-à-vis the

existing adjoining building of the respondent.

7. This Court, in exercise of its supervisory

jurisdiction, does not have the latitude of positioning

itself in place of the trial court as well as the appellate

court for examining and evaluating as to whether

grant of temporary injunction in the form of status

quo by the court below is factually and legally correct

or not.

8. Hence, as such, this petition is dismissed.

(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE

SRINAGAR:

23.02.2026
“Mir Arif”