| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 170 2020 SLD 170 2020 CLC 111 |
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision Petition No. 300-B of 2012, decision & hearing Dated: 01-11-2018.
SHAKEEL AHMAD, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Syed Umar Ali Shah
Respondent(s) by: Syed Fakhar-ud-Din Shah and Muhammad Fayyaz
Civil Revision Petition No. 300-B of 2012, decision & hearing Dated: 01-11-2018.
SHAKEEL AHMAD, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Syed Umar Ali Shah
Respondent(s) by: Syed Fakhar-ud-Din Shah and Muhammad Fayyaz
SHAH QAIMOOS KHAN AND 4 OTHERS
VS
FAIZULLAH KHAN AND ANOTHER
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: S.12(2),115,O.IX,R.13
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Limitation Act, 1908
Section: 181
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S.12(2) & O.IX, R.13---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 181----Suit for declaration---Decree, setting aside of---Fraud and misrepresentation---Limitation---Petition for setting aside of decree was dismissed being time barred---Validity---Decree which was to be set aside was passed on 13-10-1970 when a separate suit was maintainable on the grounds of fraud, collusion and lack of jurisdiction---Generally, all laws would apply prospectively except those affecting procedure---Matters with regard to remedy and jurisdiction were to be considered to be procedural in nature---If retroactive operation of even a procedural statute did cause inconvenience or injustice then Court was not to favour an interpretation giving retrospective effect to the statute---Present revision petition had been filed after forty years from passing of impugned decree, which was time barred---Court had power to set aside its own , decree or final order which was fraudulently or collusively obtained but party asserting fraud and misrepresentation must narrate full particulars of fraud and misrepresentation not only in the petition but must also prove the same through cogent evidence---Mere asserting fraud without proof of the same was not sufficient for setting aside a decree---When suit was filed then petitioners were minor and their father was defendant in the said suit---Father of petitioners did not challenge the impugned decree during his life time---Petitioners had failed to prove fraud through evidence, in circumstance---No mis-reading or non-reading of evidence or any illegality or irregularity had been pointed out in the impugned orders passed by the Courts below---Revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Adnan Afzal v. Capt. Sher Afzal PLD 1969 SC 187; Government of Sindh and another v. Ch. Fazal Muhammad and another PLD 1991 SC 197 and Abdur Rauf and others v. Abdur Rahim Khan PLD 1982 Pesh. 172 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.IX, R.13---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 181---Petition for setting aside of a decree---Limitation---Petition for setting aside of decree could be filed within three years. (c)…
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