Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Mohammad Altaf Bhat vs Rumaisa Jan And Another on 3 December, 2021
Author: Javed Iqbal Wani
Bench: Javed Iqbal Wani
Regular
S. No. 15
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CM (M) 33/2021
CM (1022/2021)
Mohammad Altaf Bhat
... Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through: Mr. Sheikh Mushtaq, Advocate
V/s
Rumaisa Jan and another
... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Omais Kawoosa, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
ORDER
03-12-2021
1. This composite petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner throwing challenge to award dated 9.12.2017 passed by Tehsil Legal Services Committee, Kulgam, in case titled as "Rumaisa Jan vs Mohammad Altaf Bhat".
2. The award is being challenged inter alia on the ground that the same per se is against the mandate of section 19 of the J&K State Legal Services Authorities Act and the Regulations, and that the award has been passed in breach of principles of natural justice, equity and fair play on the premise that the petitioner is not father of respondent no. 1 and that under section 488 Cr.PC, the petitioner could not be CM (M) 33/2021 Mohammad Altaf Bhat Page 2 of 3 fastened with the liability of paying maintenance towards respondent no. 1.
3. It is stated that the petitioner is an illiterate person and does not understand Urdu or English language and the award has been passed in English which was never explained to him. It is further submitted that the petitioner does not understand as to on which he is affixing his thumb impression. The impugned award is also stated to be bad in view of the suit filed by respondent no. 1 seeking declaration that the petitioner herein is her father, to which the government- defendants, as also the petitioner herein, is stated to have filed written statement opposing the suit and praying for its dismissal and that the suit being pending adjudication.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. The warp and woof under the shade of which the entire controversy raised in the instant petition is that the impugned award of the Lok Adalat has been passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and without explaining him the contents of the award inasmuch as that the matter has been referred to the Lok Adalat without the consent of the petitioner against the mandate of section 19 of the Act and that the question of the parentage of the petitioner qua respondent no. 1 is sub judice in a suit filed by the respondent no. 1 before the civil court.
CM (M) 33/2021 Mohammad Altaf Bhat Page 3 of 3
6. Perusal of the record, however, tends to show that the award has been passed in presence of the petitioner, and in recognition thereof the petitioner has affixed his thumb impression thereon signifying the fact that the matter had been referred to the Lok Adalat validly and legally, more so in view of the fact that the petitioner has not raised any objection in this regard before the Lok Adalat or lodged any protest thereof. The issue raised that the petitioner was neither explained the content of the award nor was same read over to him also pales into insignificance as the same are complicated disputed questions of fact of complex nature which for determination may require oral evidence to be taken and that the said disputed question of fact of complex nature may not appropriately be decided either in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction or under supervisory jurisdiction of this court.
7. The petition manifestly being misconceived entails dismissal and is accordingly dismissed.
(JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE Srinagar 03-12-2021 N Ahmad NISSAR A BHAT 2021.12.04 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document