Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 3026 2006 SLD 3026 2006 PLD 88
Sindh High Court
R. A. No. 24 of 2001, decided on 18th April, 2005
MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, J
Jhamat Jethanand for Applicants Nos. 1 to 3. Masood A. Noorani, Addl. A.G. Sindh. for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 3. Ghulam Shabbir Memon for
Respondent No. 4.

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN and 2 others--Applicants

VS

GOVERNMENT OF Sindh court through District Officer (Revenue), Nawabshah and 3 others

Law:

Section:

Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act (V of 1975)--- ---- Ss.3, 4, 11 & 12---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VII, R.11---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Rejecting of plaint---Jurisdiction of Civil Court, bar of---Non-availability of Tribunal---Notice issued by authorities for removal of encroachment was assailed by plaintiff in civil suit---Trial Court rejected the plaint under O.VII, R.11 C.P.C., in view of the bar contained in S.11 of Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act, 1975---Order passed by Trial Court was maintained by Appellate Court---Contention of the plaintiff was that at the time of filing of suit there was no Tribunal as provided in proviso to S.11 of Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act, 1975, therefore, notice for removal of encroachment was assailed before Civil Court---Validity---Even if the contention of plaintiff was correct that at relevant time no Tribunal was constituted, it would not confer jurisdiction on Civil Court, which was otherwise barred under S.11 of Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act, 1975---If no forum was available to an aggrieved person and the jurisdiction of Civil Court was barred under the law, then the absence of forum would not have the effect of conferring jurisdiction on a Civil Court---Aggrieved person in such circumstances could approach High Court invoking constitutional jurisdiction, which clearly provided that if no remedy was available to a person, such person could approach High Court under Art.199 of the Constitution---Conclusion of the two Courts below that jurisdiction of Civil Court was barred, was not open to any exception---High Court declined to interfere with the orders passed by two Courts below---Revision was dismissed in circumstances. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, J.---This revision application is directed against the judgment and decree dated 19-12-2000 and 5-1-2001 respectively passed by the learned IInd Additional District Judge, Nawabshah thereby maintaining the order passed-by the learned IInd Senior Civil Judge, Nawabshah rejecting the plaint under Order VII, rule 11, C.P.C. The relevant facts are that the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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