Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 1259 2010 SLD 1259 2010 MLD 1504
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No. 301 of 2009, decision & hearing Dated: 07-06-2010.
ATTAULLAH KHAN, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mastan Ali Zaidi
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Ayaz Khan Qasuria

INAYAT ULLAH KHAN AND 5 OTHERS

VS

ABDUL KARIM AND 4 OTHERS

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: S.115,O.XXVI,R.1

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXVI, R.1 & S.115---Appointment of Commission---Scope---Appellate Court appointed Commission to prepare the site plan and investigate the true facts of the case---Petitioners objected appointment of Commission--Normally the Commission was appointed to bring on surface some facts which the parties had failed to declare in the court---Report of Commission was not exclusive and was always subject to objection of the parties and the court was not bound to straightaway accept or reject the same---In the present case petitioners were not adversely affected from such appointment; they had ample opportunities to bring their view points on record before the court regarding their objections, if any---Even if the report was accepted, it would not amount to evidence, but would only help the court in reaching to a correct conclusion---No illegality or miscarriage of justice had been pointed out-Maintainability of revision petition was also doubtful for the reason that the impugned order was not an order in stricto senso nor it had decided some issues between the parties finally, whereas revision would be against a case decided and when the case was not decided, revision would not lie---Appointment of local Commission was for the purpose to collect some facts which could not be in favour of any party---Impugned order being not final or deciding a case, the revision was not maintainable and also being without merits. 2005 CLC 1347 SC (AJ&K) and Pakistan Fisheries Ltd. v. United Bank Ltd. PLD 1993 SC 109 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: ATTAULLAH KHAN, J.--- Through this Civil Revision Petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 4-7-2009 passed by the learned Appellate Court whereby a Local Commissioner was appointed to investigate the facts of the case. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that Abdul Karim Khan etc. respondents filed the suit for partition of the suit property on the grounds mentioned in the plaint. The suit was contested by the defendants and pleadings of the parties gave rise to the framing of six issues. 3. After recording evidence, the suit was dismissed by the trial Court vide order…
🔒
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