A tenant appealed an interlocutory direction to deposit arrears and monthly occupational charges.
Judge / Bench — Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Parihar, Judge
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that appealability depends on the order’s substantive statutory foundation, not merely its monetary or interim character. Order XXXIX Rule 10 requires a clear admission of the relevant liability, absent here where both the alleged arrears and higher occupational charges were disputed. The direction was therefore treated as traceable to Section 151 CPC and outside the specified appealable orders. The appeal was dismissed with liberty to pursue an appropriate remedy, including Article 227. Crucially, the Court did not uphold the payment direction on merits or decide tenancy termination, contractual rent, discharge of rent obligations or entitlement to mesne profits.
Case — Ghulam Mohammad Dhobi v. Abdul Hamid Malla · FAO/20/2026 · 29 October 2026 · Srinagar wing
Advocates appearing — Appellant — Mr. Adil Aismi, Advocate. Respondent — Mr. Zahoor Ahmad Shah, Advocate, with Mr. Sibghatullah Shah, Advocate.