MOHAMMAD ASHRAF LONE MR. MIR UMAR vs SHRIKANT BALASAHEB SUSE AND ORS. (REVENUE) — CCP(S) /440/2025
Case under Contempt of Courts Act Section 11,12,. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 24th April 2026.
CNR: JKHC010069142025
Filing Number
CCP(S) /5178/2025
Filing Date
20-12-2025
Registration No
CCP(S) /440/2025
Registration Date
20-12-2025
Judge
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL
Coram
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL
Bench Type
SINGLE BENCH
Category
SB CONTEMPT PETITION ( 113 )
Sub-Category
OWP. ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
OTHER WRIT PETITION (OWP)
Decision Date
24th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MOHAMMAD ASHRAF LONE MR. MIR UMAR
Respondent(s)
SHRIKANT BALASAHEB SUSE AND ORS. (REVENUE)
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL
FOR ORDERS FRESH
FOR ORDERS(NON FRESH)
FOR ORDERS(NON FRESH)
FOR ORDERS(NON FRESH)
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 23-12-2025 | FOR ORDERS FRESH | |
| 24-04-2026 | FOR ORDERS(NON FRESH) | |
| 01-04-2026 | FOR ORDERS(NON FRESH) | |
| 23-02-2026 | FOR ORDERS(NON FRESH) |
Orders
Summary The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir dismissed a contempt petition filed by Mohammad Ashraf Lone (senior citizen) against respondents regarding his land used for road construction, finding that the previous court order had been substantially complied with. However, the court permitted the petitioner to pursue an appropriate legal remedy to claim compensation for the period (over 8 years) during which his land remained in the respondents' possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir dismissed a contempt petition filed by Mohammad Ashraf Lone (senior citizen) against respondents regarding his land used for road construction, finding that the previous court order had been substantially complied with. However, the court permitted the petitioner to pursue an appropriate legal remedy to claim compensation for the period (over 8 years) during which his land remained in the respondents' possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts