Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 2321 2018 SLD 2321 2018 PLJ 122
Quetta High Court
C.R. No. 334 of 2008, decision Dated: 22.06.2017. Hearing Date : 16.06.2017.
NAZEER AHMED LANGOVE, JUSTICE
Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed Hashmi and Muhammad Usman Tareen, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Iqbal Ahmed Kasi, Advocate for
Respondent No. 1. Mr. Farooq Sarwar, Assistant, Advocate General for
Respondents.

PAKISTAN RAILWAYS EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. THROUGH GENERAL SECRETARY, QUETTA

VS

HAJI GHULAM HAIDER AND 3 OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Specific Relief Act, 1877-- ----S. 42--Civil Procedure Code, (V of 1908), O.XXXIX R. 182--Petitioner was registered Society and leased out Railway Land through registered lease deed to members--Interference in property--Property Encroachment by member--Suit for declaration and permanent injunction--Dismissed--Appeal--Dismissed--Challenge to--Suit was filed by petitioner/plaintiff with prayer mentioned hereinabove, in opening paras of this order, contested on legal and factual grounds, in meantime, with consent of parties s local commission was constituted, Miss Sarwat Hina, Advocate/local commissioner visited property in dispute and submitted her report, wherein it has clearly been mentioned that at time of visit of disputed property, concerned Patwari was not present, objected to, by petitioner/plaintiff on spot which is available in her report, apart from that, after submitting, report petitioner/plaintiff filed his objections on report of local commissioner but without resolving same or framing at least any legal issue, trial Court passed order and decree impugned in haste, without adhering to, mandatory provisions of CPC, unfortunately, maintained by appellate Court also--By now it is a settled principle of law that in civil cases, since valuable rights of parties are involved, therefore, it is advisable that same should be decision dated: merits and in accordance with law, after affording ample opportunity of evidence and hearing--Both Courts below erred in law, by relying upon report submitted by local commissioner, objected to, by petitioner/plaintiff timely but not considered, trial Court did not bother to frame issues and decide matter once for all--Similarly, appellate Court should have decided matter reasonably and justly by dilating upon facts with reasons but it also maintained order of trial Court without applying judicial mind--Courts below failed to exercise their jurisdiction properly and strictly in accordance with law which caused miscarriage of justice, so, at this juncture, without going through merits and de-merits of main case lest, it cause any prejudice to parties, I would like to remand matter to trial Court for proceedings and…
🔒
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