Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar BenchAbdul Majeed Mir vs Ut Of J&K And Others on 11 November, 2020Author:Dhiraj Singh ThakurBench:Dhiraj Singh ThakurSupplementary Cause List -I\n                                                                       Case No.101\n\n             HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR\n                         AT SRINAGAR\n                            (Through video conference)\n\n\n                                              CM No. 5139/2020 in\n                                              LPA No. 144/2020\n                                              CM No. 5140/2020\n\nAbdul Majeed Mir                                   .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)\n\n\n                 Through :- Mr. SajidIrfan, Advocate\n\n\n                V/s\n\n\nUT of J&K and others                                            .....Respondent(s)\n\n                 Through :-\n\n\nCoram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, JUDGE\n       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICEVINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE\n\n                                    ORDER11.11.2020CM No. 5139/2020Allowed as prayed for.The appellant shall make the deficiencies good within two weeks from\n\nthe date the Court starts functioning normally.Application is disposed of accordingly.LPA No. 144/2020The present Letters' Patent Appeal has been preferred against the\n\njudgement and order dated 26.08.2020 passed by the Writ Court in OWP\n\nNo. 51/2017.LPA No. 144/2020It appears that the respondent No. 5 was a tenant in the property of the\n\n           petitioner-appellant, which got gutted in a fire incident, which according to the\n\n           case set up by the appellant, was due to the negligence of respondent No. 5. In\n\n           the writ petition, the relief prayed for was for issuance of a writ of mandamus\n\n           against the respondents, commanding them to release compensation to the tune\n\n           of Rs.30 lacs in favour of the appellant for damaging his two storeyed\n\n           residential house.The learned Single Judge vide judgment and order impugned\n\n           dismissed the petition on the ground that the respondent No. 5 was the private\n\n           limited company, which had been incorporated as a tenant and, therefore, in\n\n           that view of the matter, no case for grant of any compensation was made out. It\n\n           was however, kept open to the petitioner-appellant to avail his civil remedies.\n\n           Learned counsel for the appellant states that he had already availed acivil\n\n           remedy by approaching the LokAdalat, which had considered his application\n\n           and issued directions to the respondents to consider the same.In our opinion, the learned counsel for the appellant has grossly erred\n\n           in assuming that the document relied upon by the appellant is in any manner a\n\n           civil remedy as was envisaged by the writ Court. We make it clear that a civil\n\n           remedy, which was discussed in the writ Court's order indicated to file a civil\n\n           suit before a Civil Court.Having gone through the records and having heard learned counsel for\n\n           the appellant, we feel that there is no merit in the present appeal, which is\n\n           accordingly, dismissed along with connected application.(Vinod Chatterji Koul)         (Dhiraj Singh Thakur)\n                                         Judge                          Judge\n           SRINAGAR\n           11.11.2020\n           (Naresh)NARESH KUMAR2020.11.14 14:30I attest to the accuracy andintegrity of this document