✦ High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh

REGULAR CAUSE LIST v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.

SANJEEV KUMAR, SANJAY PARIHAR

Case at a glance

Key paragraphs

  • Para 33. Today, when the case was called out nobody turned up to appear on behalf of the petitioners. Neither the amount as directed has been deposited, nor have any steps taken for service upon the respondents No. 4 and 5. It is, therefore, evident that…

Judgment

Through: Mr. Mohd Younis Hafiz, Assisting Counsel for R-1 and 2. Mr. Zia Ahad, Advocate vice Mr. Mir Suhail, Advocate for R-3. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDER 22.12.2025

1.

This petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on 15th July, 2025 and was restored vide order dated 1st September,

2.

On 27th October, 2025, when this matter came up for consideration, this Court, while granting time to the learned counsel for the petitioners to take requisite steps for service upon the respondents No. 4 and 5, further provided that in the event of non-compliance with the direction to deposit 50% of the amount, as ordered by this Court vide order dated 20th May, 2025, the respondent Bank would be at liberty to proceed against the secured assets in accordance with law. MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

23.12.25

3.

Today, when the case was called out nobody turned up to appear on behalf of the petitioners. Neither the amount as directed has been deposited, nor have any steps taken for service upon the respondents No. 4 and 5. It is, therefore, evident that the petitioners are no longer interested in prosecuting the present petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed for non-prosecution for the second time. (SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE SRINAGAR: 22.12.2025 “Mir Arif” MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

23.12.25

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments