Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 3071 2016 SLD 3071 2016 MLD 644
Lahore High Court
Civil Appeal No. 298-D of 2005, decided on 24th November, 2014.
CH. MUSHTAQ AHMAD, JUSTICE

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

AURANGZEB through L.Rs. - er

VS

MASOOD HUSSAIN through Legal Heirs and 4 OTHERS --Respondent

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) --------- ----------O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2 & O.VII, R.11 --------- Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 54 --------- Suit for permanent injunction against co-sharers --------- Application for grant of temporary injunction --------- Rejection of plaint while deciding the application for interim injunction --------- Scope --------- Trial Court rejected the plaint while deciding the application for grant of temporary injunction holding that if plaintiff/petitioner had any grievance, he could file a suit for partition as suit for permanent injunction against the co-sharers was not maintainable --------- Validity --------- Both the parties were co-sharers in the suit land --------- Plaint was rejected on the day when only application for grant of temporary injunction was fixed for arguments --------- Arguments advanced by the plaintiffs were with regard to interim relief and not on main suit and defendants contested only application filed under O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2, C.P.C. --------- Trial Court while dismissing the application for temporary injunction observed that suit for permanent injunction against the co-sharers was not maintainable and plaint was also rejected --------- Both the courts below had exercised jurisdiction contrary to law and had wrongly dismissed the suit --------- Courts below had committed illegality in exercise of jurisdiction --------- Impugned s and decrees passed by both the courts below were set aside --------- Case was remanded to the Trial Court where suit and application under O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2, C.P.C. would be deemed pending and should be decided afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties --------- Revision was accepted, in circumstances. Sardara and 4 others v. Muhammad Khan PLD 1998 SC 1509; Fazal and others v. Ghulam Muhammad and others 2003 SCMR 999; Syed Kamran Hussain v. PTCL and another 2012 CLC 1998 and Iftikharul Haq v. District Canal Officer and others 2005 CLC 1740 ref. Sardara and 4 others v. Muhammad Khan PLD 1998 SC 1509; Fazal and others v. Ghulam Muhammad and others 2003 SCMR 999 and Syed Kamran Hussain v. PTCL and another 2012 CLC 1998 rel. THIS 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