Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Dec 3: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed as “utterly misconceived and frivolous” a writ petition filed by a Kupwara resident challenging the sealing of his house by J&K Bank under the SARFAESI Act, imposing exemplary costs of Rs 1 lakh on him for repeatedly misusing the process of law.
A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar was hearing a petition filed by Ghulam Hassan Shah of Devar Lolab, Kupwara, who had sought a writ of mandamus directing J&K Bank to de-seal a single-storey house at Survey No. 1075, Dever Anderbagh Lolab, claiming that the property was not a secured asset and therefore could not be proceeded against under Sections 13 and 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
The Bench, however, noted that the petitioner had a long history of litigation aimed at stalling recovery proceedings. Earlier, he had challenged SARFAESI action in WP(C) No. 1520/2024, arguing that the mortgaged property was agricultural land and thus protected under Section 31 of the Act. That plea was rejected by the High Court on November 29, 2024, which held that the land, having a residential house and business unit constructed on it, would fall within the definition of “residential property” and was amenable to action under SARFAESI.
Not satisfied, Shah then filed Review Petition No. 14/2025, reiterating the same contention that the secured asset was purely agricultural land. The Division Bench dismissed the review on July 15, 2025 as “grossly misconceived” and imposed costs of Rs 50,000, observing that the petitioner appeared to have deliberately mortgaged land which he believed might not be amenable to attachment and sale in case of default – conduct which, the court remarked, prima facie amounted to cheating.
The latest petition, WP(C) No. 2326/2025, was filed even though the petitioner failed to deposit the earlier cost amount of Rs 50,000. The Bench recorded that despite five months having passed since the order in the review petition, the costs had not been paid and a robkar (contempt/notice for non-compliance) already stood framed by the Court.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
