Jammu and Kashmir High Court Dismisses Review Petitions in Zahida Shah v. Bilal Ahmad Dar Case

Doctrine of Merger Does Not Apply; Review Petitioners Granted Liberty for Independent Legal Action

In a significant ruling, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, under the bench of Mr. Sanjay Dhar, J., dismissed the review petitions filed by Zahida Shah and others in the case against Bilal Ahmad Dar and others. The judgment, delivered on November 8, 2025, elucidates the non-applicability of the doctrine of merger to the dismissal of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) by the Supreme Court, thus allowing the petitioners to pursue a review petition in the High Court.

The petitioners, Zahida Shah and Athar Shabir Shah, sought to review an order dated January 3, 2025, which involved a compromise agreement that the petitioners wished to recall. The compromise was originally settled in 2015 concerning property rights and eviction disputes. The High Court also addressed the impleadment application filed by Dr. Tasnim Yaqoob and others, seeking to be added as parties in the proceedings related to the compromise agreement.

The judgment clarified that the dismissal of an SLP by the Supreme Court without granting leave or assigning reasons does not attract the doctrine of merger. Thus, the review petitioners retain the right to file a review petition before the High Court. This legal position was backed by the precedent set in Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala, which affirms that a non-speaking order from the Supreme Court does not merge with the order under challenge, preserving the right to review.

The court also examined the grounds for review petitions, emphasizing that error apparent on record must be evident for a successful review. The petitioners' claims of core issues not being determined and erroneous observations were dismissed, as these contentions had been addressed in the original proceedings.

Furthermore, the court provided liberty to applicants seeking impleadment to pursue independent legal actions for the declaration of ownership rights or eviction, dismissing their application in the current proceedings.

In conclusion, the High Court's decision reinforces the procedural autonomy of lower courts in dealing with review petitions post-dismissal of SLPs, while ensuring procedural fairness through independent legal recourse for parties claiming ownership rights.

Bottom Line:

Doctrine of merger does not apply to dismissal of Special Leave Petition by the Supreme Court without granting leave or assigning reasons, leaving the right to file a review petition open before the High Court.

Statutory Provision(s): Doctrine of Merger, Special Leave Petition, Review Petition, Impleadment of Parties

Zahida Shah v. Bilal Ahmad Dar, (Jammu And Kashmir)(Srinagar) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2805976