Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Jan 13: Expressing displeasure over the conduct of petitioner and his counsel for concealing the facts, High Court has dismissed the plea against the eviction of migrant property in district Kulgam.
The HC also imposed Rs one lakh costs on petitioner for suppressing material facts to gain advantage over other side.
The HC was hearing a plea by Fayaz Ahmad Rather challenging an order passed by District Magistrate, Kulgam on November 12, 2022 directing Tehsildar Kulgam to proceed on spot and evict the petitioner from the migrant land.
Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi said that the conduct depicted by the petitioner as also his counsel is deplorable.
“The court records it very distastefully that the counsel appearing before this Court, despite having represented the petitioners throughout, has concealed the material particulars from the court to gain an undue advantage over the other side so as to obtain the favorable orders from the court of law,” HC said.
Holding the plea of petitioner, rather, “not maintainable”, the court recorded that it is a clear case of suppression of material facts. “Petitioner has patently made a false statement on oath”.
Not only the petitioner, Justice Kazmi noted, but his counsel Peer Shafeeq Ahmed has also “intentionally concealed” the material facts to the court and “this court passed an interim order without having any knowledge of misrepresentation of the petitioner.”
“Though counsel for the petitioner is also responsible for professional misconduct but this court only warns him to be very careful in future,” the court recorded.
The court noted that the petitioner has stated that status quo order was passed by the Court of Munsif Kulgam in favor of the petitioner.
“But he has nowhere stated that the status quo order granted by the Court of Munsiff, Kulgam on November 09, 2011 was vacated after hearing all the parties to the dispute with a detailed order on August 04, 2012,” the court said.
Justice Kazmi pointed out that the petitioner has also suppressed the fact that he had challenged the order of dismissal passed on August 04, 2012 by way of civil miscellaneous appeal before the Court of Principal District Judge, Kulgam, which was also dismissed on December 27, 2012.
“ Petitioner as well as his counsel have admittedly concealed material particulars in order to gain advantage over the other side and also to seek appropriate relief by concealing and suppressing material facts as such are guilty of misleading this court,” Justice Kazmi said while dismissing the plea.
“In the circumstances, therefore, the petitioner is burdened with a cost of Rs. 100,000 to be deposited in the Lawyers Welfare Fund within a period of one month,” the court ordered.
Follow our WhatsApp channel