| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 1228 2017 SLD 1228 2017 PLJ 444 |
Lahore High Court
W.P. No. 1292 of 2017, decided on 7.2.2017. Date of hearing: 7.2.2017.
ABDUL RAHMAN AURANGZEB, J.
Mahar Muhammad Waris Bharwana, Advocate for Petitioner. Mian Bilal Bashir, Advocate for
Respondents No. 1 to 5.
W.P. No. 1292 of 2017, decided on 7.2.2017. Date of hearing: 7.2.2017.
ABDUL RAHMAN AURANGZEB, J.
Mahar Muhammad Waris Bharwana, Advocate for Petitioner. Mian Bilal Bashir, Advocate for
Respondents No. 1 to 5.
Syed ABID ALI SHAH . er
VS
AFSHEEN ATHAR and 22 others . --Respondents
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908) --.-- --.-- O.VII R. 11 & O.XIV R. 2 --.-- Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199 --.-- Framing of issue --.-- Limitation --.-- Question of --.-- Whole evidence is required on any of issue which covers whole dispute or can be treated any issue as particular preliminary issue --.-- Knowledge of 20 years back effect of case --.-- Purpose of framing of issues is to concise dispute in a questionnaire form, so as to enable parties to converge upon real dispute and later on Court is also in a position to decide matter according to real controversy --.-- It is also a requirement of law when Court deems that on basis of issue of limitation, a fact which is well within knowledge of petitioner, then it is in fitness of things to treat issue of limitation as issue of law, and can further assuming it as; preliminary issue --.-- Knowledge of mutations since 20-years back is based upon judicial verdict, then there is no need to further proceed in matter, except by treating issue of limitation as preliminary issue --.-- Petition was dismissed. ORDER Through this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged impugned orders dated 23.06.2015 and 03.12.2016, respectively, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Pirmahal, as well as, learned Additional District Judge, Pirmahal, District Toba Tek Singh. 2. Brief facts, of the case are that the petitioner instituted a suit for declaration against the respondents to the effect that he is legal heir of deceased Saydi Ahmad Shah from the suit property. The other Respondents No. 1 to 19 are also co-sharer in the suit property, but depriving the petitioner, Mutations No. 2102, dated 12.10.1994, Mutation No. 2103, dated 21.10.1994, Mutation No. 2200, dated 27.08.1995 and Mutation No. 2204, dated 14.09.1995, were sanctioned in favour of the respondents in connivance with the revenue authorities, which are illegal, unlawful and without notice to the petitioner, only to usurp his legal share from the estate of Saydi Ahmad Shah (deceased). It is further mentioned in the petition that another suit titled "Syed Dur Hussain Shah vs. Afsheen Athar, etc." was instituted, wherein mutations No. 5086, dated…
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