Srinagar, Sept. 7, KDC: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has directed the trial court to immediately bring under lock and key two shops at Mirza Bagh, Nigeen, after raising serious questions over the manner in which an eviction decree was executed and the shops handed over to the decree holders.
Justice Rahul Bharti, hearing a civil second appeal filed by Tariq Ahmad Gojree and another against Nazir Ahmad Kawosa, deceased, through his legal representatives, directed the 3rd Civil Subordinate Judge (Forest Magistrate), Srinagar, to place the two shops under the custody of the Nazir, Principal District Judge, Srinagar, until further orders.
The court passed the directions after examining the execution proceedings relating to a civil suit over the two shops.
The dispute originated from a suit filed by Nazir Ahmad Kawosa, claiming ownership and landlordship over the shops, seeking eviction of the appellants, who were stated to be tenants. The trial court eventually decreed the suit on June 28, 2025, directing eviction of the occupants and delivery of actual and peaceful possession of the two shops to the plaintiff.
The appellants challenged the decree before the 1st Additional District Judge, Srinagar, and sought a stay on its operation. The application for stay was dismissed on August 12, 2025. The first appellate court subsequently dismissed the civil appeal on February 10, 2026.
However, the High Court noted that the decree had already been executed before the appellants’ first appeal was finally decided.
According to the order, the decree holders had filed an execution petition on July 14, 2025, even before the prescribed period for filing an appeal had expired. The execution proceedings were registered as File No. 1628/2025.
The High Court noted that the execution of the decree allegedly took place in August 2025 through the Tehsildar, North Srinagar and Naib Tehsildar, Nandpora, who were said to have handed over vacant possession of the shops to the decree holders.
Justice Bharti expressed concern over the manner in which the execution was carried out, particularly the alleged removal of locks without an order from the executing court authorising such action.
“This court, as being highest court of appeal in a civil suit, is caught in a disturbed state of affairs as to the manner in which the execution of the decree has been attended to by the executing court of getting the decree executed by outsourcing it to the Tehsildar and the Naib Tehsildar without deputing the Nazir (Bailiff) of the court to carry out the execution of the decree as directed,” the court observed.
The High Court further noted that the execution order at the relevant stage did not direct removal of the locks unless the appellants themselves removed them.
The issue assumed significance after the decree holders, while filing a caveat before the High Court on February 11, 2026, did not disclose that the trial court’s decree had already been executed and the appellants had been removed from the shops.
The High Court observed that had this fact been disclosed, it would not have passed an interim order on February 19, 2026, directing that the execution proceedings remain on hold.
The court said it was now confronted with the question of whether the decree had been executed in accordance with law or whether its execution remained affected by the subsequent interim order of the High Court.
“If the facts of the case are to be taken as now have come to be reported, then the execution of the decree came to take place in the month of August 2025 itself through the medium of Tehsildar, North Srinagar and Naib Tehsildar, Nandpora,” the court recorded.
Justice Bharti said that if the decree had been lawfully executed, restitution could be ordered under Section 144 of the J&K Code of Civil Procedure, Samvat 1977, in the event the appellants ultimately succeeded in the second appeal.
However, the court said the execution ought to have been carried out in the manner prescribed by law and, at the present stage, it was “afraid” that this could not be said to have happened.
The High Court consequently directed the 3rd Civil Subordinate Judge (Forest Magistrate), Srinagar, to immediately bring the two shops under lock and key and place them in the supurdari of the Nazir, Principal District Judge, Srinagar, until further orders.
The Registrar Judicial, Srinagar, has also been directed to requisition the execution petition titled “Nazir Ahmad Kawosa through legal heirs vs Tariq Ahmed Gojree and another” and forward a copy of the order to the trial court for compliance.
The High Court had earlier formulated a substantial question of law in the second appeal on February 19, 2026. The matter has been listed for further hearing on September 29, 2026. (KDC)
