Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 1056 2016 SLD 1056 2016 CLC 1079
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeal No. 133 of 2014, decided on 29th September, 2015. Date of hearing: 24th August, 2015.
SAJJAD ALI SHAH AND MUHAMMAD, JUNAID GHAFFAR, JJ
Mirza Sarfraz Ahmed for Appellant. Khawaja Shamsul Islam for
Respondent No. 1.

ABDUL WAHEED USMAN through legally constituted attorney-

VS

GUL HAMEED GHANCHI and 6 others

Law:

Section:

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.II, R.2---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art.91---Suit for declaration of title---Frame of suit---Cause of action---Bar of suit---Limitation---Scope---Suit of plaintiff was rejected on ground that it was barred by limitation as well as under R.2 of O.II, C.P.C.---Contention of plaintiff was that Trial Court had failed to appreciate that previous suit filed by plaintiff was in respect of a different cause of action, hence the provisions of O.II, R.2, C.P.C. and that of Art.91 of Limitation Act, 1908 were not applicable and suit was not barred under S.42 of Specific Relief Act, 1877 for the reason that suit was filed only when it came to the knowledge of plaintiff that some construction was being done on the said property (land)---Defendant's plea was that defendant being an owner of plot which had no concern with the property in dispute since plaintiff had earlier filed a suit in respect of said property, therefore, a subsequent suit seeking declaration in respect of same cause of action was barred under O.II, R.2, C.P.C.---Held, that since cause of action for filing present suit arose only when it transpired that area in question of plot had included areas of other plots, bar of O.II, R.2, C.P.C., would not be applicable---When suit was filed, the question that whether the other plot was carved out after allegedly encroaching upon the areas of other plots had not arisen and no relief in that regard could have been sought by plaintiff and with regard to objection that suit was time barred---High Court observed that construction work was already started and plaintiff got knowledge about such fact in year 2012---Period of limitation would start from thereon and not from the date of site plan dated 20-6-1998 through which existence of plot was being claimed---Plaintiff could have presumed that for some reason area of plot in question included some area of other plot or it had been carved out after bifurcating and or encroaching his plot until construction started and counting from date of such knowledge about construction, suit was within period of limitation---For purpose of…
🔒
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