| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 1001 2014 SLD 1001 2014 YLR 2442 |
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeal No. 64 of 2013, decision Dated: 17-12-2013. Hearing Date : 11-12-2013. (On appeal from the order of the High Court Dated 18-5-2013 in Writ Petition No. 89 of 2009).
MUHAMMAD AZAM KHAN, CHIEF, JUSTICE, CH. MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM ZIA, JUSTICE
Javaid Najm-ul-Saqib Advocate for Appellant. Khalid Yousaf Advocate for
Respondent No.10. Ch. Muhammad Mumtaz Advocate for
Respondent No.7. Ejaz Nazir Advocate for
Respondent No.5.
Civil Appeal No. 64 of 2013, decision Dated: 17-12-2013. Hearing Date : 11-12-2013. (On appeal from the order of the High Court Dated 18-5-2013 in Writ Petition No. 89 of 2009).
MUHAMMAD AZAM KHAN, CHIEF, JUSTICE, CH. MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM ZIA, JUSTICE
Javaid Najm-ul-Saqib Advocate for Appellant. Khalid Yousaf Advocate for
Respondent No.10. Ch. Muhammad Mumtaz Advocate for
Respondent No.7. Ejaz Nazir Advocate for
Respondent No.5.
ALI SHAN
VS
MIRPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH CHAIRMAN AND 18 OTHERS
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O.XXXIX,Rr.1,2
Law: Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974
Section: 44
Law: Azad Jammu and Kashmir Mirpur Development Authority Ordinance, 1974
Section: 11
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Mirpur Development Authority Ordinance, 1974 S.11---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S. 44---Grant of interim injunction---Conditions---Scope---Conditions necessary for issuance of a stay order were a good prima facie arguable case, irreparable loss which a party would suffer if stay order was not issued or due to issuance of stay order the other party would suffer loss and balance of convenience---Question of irreparable loss had to be considered by the court if a good prima facie arguable case was made out by a party---Irreparable loss was the loss which would be suffered by a party if stay order was issued or not---Party was not bound to show all the circumstances for success of his/her case for making out a good prim facie case---Raising a fair question for determination by the court was sufficient for the same---In the present case, Master/sector plan could only be changed by the Development Authority with prior approval of Government under the provisions of Mirpur Development Authority Ordinance, 1974---Corner position of the plots of petitioner had been changed without jurisdiction by the Development Authority due to which he had got a good prima facie arguable case and if respondents succeeded in raising the construction then he would suffer an irreparable loss---Balance of convenience would also lie in favour of petitioner---Supreme Court (AJ&K) directed that respondents should not raise construction in the plots till disposal of writ petition by the High Court and they should maintain the status quo---Supreme Court further directed the High Court to consider after providing an opportunity to the Development Authority whether master/sector plan had been changed with approval of Government or not and functionaries of said Authority were directed to refrain from altering master/sector plan in an arbitrary manner without prior sanction of Government and Authority. Jamil Akhtar v. M.D.A. Mirpur through Chairman and 4 others 1996 CLC 1464; Kashmir Free Blood Bank and Welfare Centre (Registered) through Attorney v. Mirpur Development…
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