Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: S.5,54,70,70(1),O.VII,XX,R.11,18

Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Tenancy Act, (XXV of 1950)

Section: 56

Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Land Revenue Act, (XVII of 1967)

Section: 172

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- ----O. XX, R. 18 & O. VII, R. 11 & Ss. 5 & 70---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S. 172---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Tenancy Act (XXV of 1950), S. 56---Suit for partition---Forum---Applicability of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 to Revenue Courts---Trial Court decreed the suit but Appellate Court dismissed the same due to lack of jurisdiction---Validity---Revenue officer not exercising the jurisdiction under Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Tenancy Act, 1950, was not a Revenue Court but he exercised limited powers within the contemplation of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Land Revenue Act, 1967---Civil Procedure Code, 1908 was not applicable to partition proceedings under the Land Revenue Act, 1967---High Court observed that Civil Court could entertain a suit for partition with regard to an estate assessed to the payment of revenue wherein rights of joint owners should be ascertained and Court should direct such partition or separation to be made by the Collector---Civil Court had jurisdiction to entertain a suit for partition if joint property to be partitioned consisted of construction and landed property---Only forum for entertaining a suit for landed as well as constructed property jointly owned by the parties which had not been yet partitioned was the Civil Court---Civil Court could transmit a decree to the Collector for execution---Parties in the present suit, were joint owners---When parties were joint owners and only a single joint owner wanted to separate his share through official partition then his suit could not be dismissed---Preliminary decree should be passed after determining the shares of joint owners---If certain joint property was not included in a suit for partition then Court should permit a plaintiff through amendment in the plaint to include the remaining joint property in the same---Appellate Court while passing the impugned and decree had committed material illegality and irregularity---Impugned and decree passed by the Appellate Court were set aside and those of Trial Court were restored---Revision was allowed, accordingly. PLD 2009 SC 198; Muhammad Arif and others v. Nawab and others 1997 SCMR 1792; Isam…

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