| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2013 SLG 2720 2013 SLD 2720 2013 YLR 1739 |
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No. 63 of 2004 and Civil Revision No. 959 of 2007, decided on 19th November, 2012
MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J
Ikramullah Khan A.A.G. for Petitioner. Ghafoor Khan for
Respondents
Civil Revision No. 63 of 2004 and Civil Revision No. 959 of 2007, decided on 19th November, 2012
MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J
Ikramullah Khan A.A.G. for Petitioner. Ghafoor Khan for
Respondents
CHIEF LAND COMMISSIONER, N.W.F.P., PESHAWAR and 2 others
VS
Syed ALLO DIN and 8 others
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----Ss. 11, 12(2) & O. IX, R. 13---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) S. 42---Suit for declaration of title was decreed ex parte whereafter application of defendants under O. IX, R. 13, C.P.C. to set aside ex parte decree was also dismissed, and such dismissal of the said application was upheld by the Supreme Court---Defendants subsequently filed suit for declaration challenging ex parte decree on ground of fraud, misrepresentation and want of jurisdiction as during time of filing of said suit, S. 12(2), C.P.C. had not been extended to the Provincially Administered Tribal Areas---Suit for declaration challenging ex parte decree on ground of fraud and misrepresentation was dismissed on ground that same was barred by principle of res judicata---Validity---Held, that suit was not barred under S.11, C.P.C. as dismissal of application under O.IX, R. 13, C.P.C. which was upheld by Supreme Court, would have no bearing on the present suit as questions dealt therein were only under O.IX, R.13, C.P.C. which was refused on question of limitation---Questions of fraud, misrepresentation, want of jurisdiction were never considered and the only way, prior to amendment in S. 12(2), C.P.C., to challenge an order or decree on grounds of fraud, was by filing a civil suit---Suit for declaration was maintainable in all respects and questions of fraud and misrepresentation had to be considered---High Court for the sake of convenience converted the suit for declaration into an application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. and remanded the same for decision afresh---Revision was allowed, accordingly. Noorul Amin and another v. Muhammad Hashim and 27 others 1992 SCMR 1744 and Amir Muhammad and another v. Mst. Begum Jan and others PLD 2011 Pesh. 224 rel. JUDGMENT MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J.---This single judgment in Civil Revision No. 63 of 2004 will also dispose of connected Civil Revision No.959 of 2007 as common questions of law are involved in both the petitions. These cases have a chequered history. Just after amalgamation of States of Dir, Swat and Chitral, a Land Disputes Inquiry Commission, was appointed by the Provincial Government vide Notification…
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