| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 2524 2014 SLD 2524 2014 YLR 1054 |
High Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeal No. 353 of 2012, decided on 6th February, 2014
MUNIR AHMED CHAUDHARY, J
Raja Habib-Ullah Khan for Appellants. Ch. Mumtaz Hussain for
Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 353 of 2012, decided on 6th February, 2014
MUNIR AHMED CHAUDHARY, J
Raja Habib-Ullah Khan for Appellants. Ch. Mumtaz Hussain for
Respondents
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN and 2 others
VS
MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM and 7 others
Law:
Section:
West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----S. 172---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 42---Suit for declaration for correction of entries in the revenue record---Jurisdiction of civil court---Scope---Limitation---Contention of defendants was that civil court had no jurisdiction to pass direction for correction of entries in the revenue record---Trial Court decreed the suit which was upheld by the Appellate Court with certain modification---Validity---Plaintiffs and defendants were owners of suit-land having equal shares---Adverse entries were recorded in the revenue record against the plaintiffs---Defendants could not produce any proof that such entries were in accordance with law and facts---Both the courts below had rightly observed that such entries were not made in accordance with law---Plaintiffs got knowledge of wrong entries when they obtained copy of record of rights---Application for correction of entries was submitted by the plaintiffs before the District Collector but they were directed to approach the civil court on 29-6-2007---Plaintiffs filed suit on 17-7-2007 which was within prescribed period of limitation---Civil court had jurisdiction to hear, determine and adjudicate a cause by exercising judicial powers and authority---Said court had been granted general jurisdiction to try all the suits of civil nature unless their cognizance was specifically or impliedly barred---Trial Court had to consider the facts alleged in the plaint for the purpose of determining question of jurisdiction---Civil court being court of ultimate jurisdiction had the jurisdiction to examine the acts of tribunal or forum whether same were in accordance with law and limits conferred upon the said forum by law where its jurisdiction was expressly barred and conferred upon such tribunal or forum---Civil court had to examine whether such acts were illegal, mala fide or contrary to principles of natural justice---Civil court could set aside such acts of tribunal or forum---Plaintiffs had challenged wrong entries on such grounds which had attracted the jurisdiction of civil court and no ouster clause was attracted---Present suit, therefore, was within the…
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