MEHRAJ UD DIN KANT Vs. NANDI AKHTER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Despite service, nobody appears for respondent. Order dated 17th March 2009 passed by Sub-Judge Srinagar in case titled Mehraj-ud-Din Kant v. Nadia Akhter is called in question. The respodent instituted civil original suit in which she has prayed for issuance of following reliefs :- (a) a decree for declaration the effect that the residential house and the land underneath and appurtenant is that of plaintiff as the amount for the purchase of land and for the construction of the house was provided by the father of plaintiff and by selling ornaments/jewellery and precious articles and even by borrowing from her brother and father, as such the house along with the land underneath and appurtenant is that of plaintiff as absolute owner and has right to enjoy the same and the defendant has no right whatsoever regarding the ownership and title. (b) to pass decree for declaration to the effect that defendant have no right whatsoever to alienate the house in any manner or even by agreement to sell, gift, exchange, mortgage or sale and if any such agreement executed by the defendant in favour of any person by declared null void, ineffective, inoperative not binding on the plaintiff. (c) to pass a decree for injunction restrained the defendant and commanding upon him to refrain from making any alienation in any manner and further be commanded upon to desist from interfering in the peaceful enjoyment and possession of the plaintiff, of the house as delineated in the site plan as attached annexure-P. (d) any other order or direction or decree which has not been specifically prayed for the Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case be also passed in favour the plaintiff and against the defendant and decree be accordingly passed in favour of plaintiff against defendant, to meet the ends of justice.

(2.) The petitioner and respondent were tied in a marital knot and out of the said wedlock the respondent has begotten three children to the petitioner. The marriage between petitioner and respondent has been dissolved. After filing of written statement and framing of issues evidence has been lead by the respective parties before the trial Court. When the suit had reached to hearing stage, the petitioner filed an application seeking permission from the Court to appear as witness before the Court on the plea that he could not appear as his own witness before the trial Court as he was not properly advised. The respondent filed the objection to the said application, which application was dismissed by the learned trial Judge.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Considered the matter.