Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 2896 2018 SLD 2896 2018 PLJ 184
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision Petition No. 305-M of 2014 with C.M 564/2014, decision & hearing Dated: 18.01.2018.
MUHAMMAD NASIR MAHFOOZ, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Muhammad Yar Malezai, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Fazal Malik, Advocate

MST. BAHR-EFALAK

VS

FAZAL SUBHAN AND ANOTHER

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.39,R.1,2

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----S. 42--Civil Procedure Code, 1908 O. 39, R. 1, 2--Suit for declaration and permanent injunction--Death of plaintiff during pendency of suit--Benami transaction--Application for impleading as party--Allowed--Submission of amended plaint--Dismissed--Appeal--Dismissed--Refusal of ownership--Challenge to--It is well settled law by august Supreme Court of Pakistan that in order to prove a transaction to be Benami, certain essential conditions are to be fulfilled--Petitioner has failed to point out any jurisdictional defect or material irregularity and illegality in impugned concurrent s and decree of learned Courts below which could not be lightly interfered with unless there is glaring violation of law or statute as has been held by apex Court--Revision petition was dismissed. 2008 SCMR 143 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MUHAMMAD NASIR MAHFOOZ, JUSTICE---.--- This civil revision petition under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 ("CPC") read with paragraph 10 sub-paragraph 8 of Shariah Nizam-e-Adal Regulation, 2009 is directed against the judgment and decree dated 13.07.2011, passed by the learned Civil Judge-V/Illaqa Qazi, Dir Lower at Timergara, whereby, suit of the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 29.04.2014 of the learned Additional District Judge/Izafi Zilla Qazi, Samarbagh, Dir Lower, whereby the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed and judgment and decree of learned trial Court was upheld. 2. Brief and essential facts leading to the present petition are that, father of petitioner filed a suit against the Respondent No. 1 which was contested by the respondent by submitting their written statement. During pendency of the suit, the petitioner amended the suit with permission of the Court to which the respondent submitted amended written statement too. After framing of issues evidence of both the parties were recorded and after hearing both the parties, the suit filed by the father of the petitioner/plaintiff was dismissed by the learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 13.07.2011. Aggrieved from the said order the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned…
🔒
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