| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2013 SLG 2517 2013 SLD 2517 2013 YLR 942 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revisions Nos. 490 and 491 of 2010, heard on 10th December, 2012
ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J
Syed Zulfiqar Abbas Naqvi for Petitioners (in Civil Revisions Nos. 490 and 491 of 2010). Qazi Muhammad Tariq and Malik Muhammad Iqbal for
Respondents (in Civil Revisions No. 490 of 2010). M. Bilal for
Respondent (in Civil Revision No. 491 of 2010). Malik
Civil Revisions Nos. 490 and 491 of 2010, heard on 10th December, 2012
ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J
Syed Zulfiqar Abbas Naqvi for Petitioners (in Civil Revisions Nos. 490 and 491 of 2010). Qazi Muhammad Tariq and Malik Muhammad Iqbal for
Respondents (in Civil Revisions No. 490 of 2010). M. Bilal for
Respondent (in Civil Revision No. 491 of 2010). Malik
Sardar ZULFIQAR ALI KHAN and 8 others
VS
Malik SAJID BASHIR
Law:
Section:
Court Fees Act (VII of 1870)--- ----S.7---Suits Valuation Act (VII of 1887) S.8---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.39---Pecuniary jurisdiction of Appellate Court--Scope---Consolidated suit for declaration, possession, recovery of damages, compensation and cancellation of lease was partly decreed---Appeal against said order was returned by Appellate Court on ground that Appellate Court did not have the pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the appeal---Validity---Value of court-fee was fixed at Rupees 200,000 in the plaint and claims made in plaint went beyond said amount---Under S. 7(1) of the Court Fees Act, 1870 if the suit was for money (including suit for damages, compensation or arrears of maintenance of annutaties as of other sums payable periodically); the amount of fee was payable according to the value of the subject-matter---Under S. 8 of the Suits Valuation Act, 1887, in suits not attracting S.7(d)(v),(vi), (ix) or (x) of the Court Fees Act, 1870 the value of court-fee and jurisdiction shall be the same---In the present case, since recovery of possession and money was involved, therefore, the subject-matter would determine the jurisdiction---Claims in the present case, were therefore, beyond jurisdiction of the Appellate Court---Revisions were dismissed, in circumstances. Ilahi Bakhsh and others v. Mst. Bilqees Begum PLD 1985 SC 393; Mehtab Khan v. Faiz Muhammad PLD 2003 Pesh. 46 and Budha Mal v. Rallia Ram and others AIR 1928 Lah. 157(2) ref. JUDGMENT ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J.---This judgment will dispose of titled civil revision as well as Civil Revision No.491of 2010, as both these matters have arisen out of one order dated 23-4-2010 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Fateh Jang, whereby he returned the memo of appeals filed by the petitioners against the consolidated judgment and decree dated 6-2-2008. By filing these civil revisions the petitioners seek setting aside of the said order. 2. The brief facts giving rise to these civil revisions are that the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners namely Sardar Asad Ali Khan died on 8-7-2006, where-after his legal heirs filed a suit under section 39 of the Specific Relief Act 1877 for…
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