| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 3398 2007 SLD 3398 2007 PLJ 794 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.P. No. 980 of 2004, decided on 31.10.2006.
ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR & TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILLANI, JJ.
Raja Muhammad Ibrahim Satti, ASC for Petitioner. Roy M. Nawaz Kharal, ASC Mr. M.A. Zaidi, AOR, for
Respondents.
C.P. No. 980 of 2004, decided on 31.10.2006.
ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR & TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILLANI, JJ.
Raja Muhammad Ibrahim Satti, ASC for Petitioner. Roy M. Nawaz Kharal, ASC Mr. M.A. Zaidi, AOR, for
Respondents.
MUNAWAR SHAH
VS
BAHADUR SHAH and 7 others--Respondents
Law:
Section:
Limitation Act, 1908 (IX of 1908)-- ----S. 28--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 185(3)--Leave to appeal--Suit for declaration--Plea of adverse possession, dismissal of--Appeals were also dismissed--Non-maintainability of suit--Plea of prescription--Contention--Petitioner had become owner in possession of the suit property due to open and hostile possession for more than 12 years and also by prescription for being remained in possession as mortgagee for more than 60 years, was repelled--Plea was not available to him as Section 28 of the Limitation Act, had been declared repugnant to the injunctions of Islam--Right in the property could not be extinguished that the impugned was based on valid and solid reasons and was entirely in consonance with the law laid down by Supreme Court--No misreading/non-reading or misconstruction of facts or law--Leave to appeal was refused. [P. 796] A & B 1991 SCMR 2963, rel. Judgment Abdul Hameed Dogar, J.--Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 4.3.2004 of a learned Judge in Chambers of the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench, whereby Civil Revision No. 2 of 2000 filed by him was dismissed. 2. Briefly, stated the facts giving rise to the filing of instant petition are that petitioner filed a suit against respondents for declaration that he is the owner in possession of the suit land situated in village Neelore Tehsil and District Mansehra for being remained in possession as mortgagee for more than 60 years as well as being in adverse possession for more than 12 years and the respondents have lost their rights of ownership and mortgagor in the suit land. 3. The suit was contested by the respondents by filing their written statement on various grounds that the suit is not within time and also not maintainable in its present form and that Respondents No. 4 to 8 are bona fide purchasers of the land but ultimately the suit was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 20.2.1995 mainly on the ground that plea of prescription is not available to the petitioner and also that the exclusive possession over the suit land hostile to the respondents has not been proved. Petitioner filed appeal before the District…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492