Clarifying a stay made in a transfer petition, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that suspension of further proceedings in the main maintenance case did not suspend an already operative interim-maintenance order.
Judge / Bench — Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani, Judge
The earlier High Court order had also recorded the petitioner’s undertaking to comply with that obligation pending transfer and the main case’s outcome. The Court directed payment of all arrears and continued monthly compliance, emphasising the claimants’ sustenance. The clarification application was disposed of while the transfer petition remained for its scheduled hearing. The decision is useful where a procedural stay is being treated as a payment holiday: the precise scope of the stay and any undertaking must be examined separately from the subsisting interim entitlement.
Case — Kapoor Singh v. Basanti Devi and another · CrlM No. 2098/2026 in TrP(Crl) No. 27/2025 · 2026-10-13 · Jammu wing
Advocates appearing — Non-applicant/petitioner — None (as expressly recorded). Applicants/respondents — Mr. F.A. Natnoo, Advocate (through virtual mode).