Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 603 2020 SLD 603 2020 YLR 497
Peshawar High Court
C. R. No. 980-P of 2019 with C.M. No. 1221-P of 2019, decision & hearing Date : 20-04-2019
MUHAMMAD NAEEM ANWAR, JUSTICE

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

NOOR-US-SLAM

VS

IHSAN ULLAH AND 22 OTHERS

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 12(2),O.XXIII,R.1,O.VI,R.4

Law: Contract Act, 1872

Section: 214

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- ----S. 12(2), O. XXIII, R.1 & O. VI, R. 4---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act (X of 1987), S. 13---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S.214---Suit for possession through pre-emption--- Appeal---Compromise on behalf of attorney---Fraud and misrepresentation---Suit was dismissed against which appeal was filed wherein attorney of defendant got recorded his statement that he had no objection on acceptance of appeal and suit was decreed---Applicant filed application for setting aside of and decree on the ground that fraud and misrepresentation had been committed---Application for setting aside of impugned and decree was dismissed---Validity---Petitioner was bound to plead, explain and mention the mode and manner in which fraud was played before the Court and facts were misrepresented---Applicant had not given factum of fraud and misrepresentation in the application---Attorney was required to get permission of principal whenever an act was to be done on the basis of powers so delegated but when said powers had not been disputed then no such permission from principal was required---Statement of attorney had been recorded on behalf of principal within the powers so delegated and he had stated that he had received the sale consideration of suit property---Applicant had failed to prove the fact of misrepresentation before the Court below at the time when statement of his attorney was recorded---Attorney was equipped with all the powers of principal to plead before the Court---Attorney had been authorized with power of attorney executed in his favour to enter into compromise on behalf of principal---Principal could not plead otherwise once the powers had been given and admitted by him in favour of attorney---Revision was dismissed in limine, in circumstances. Mst. Zaitoon v. Mst. Rehmi through L.Rs. 2005 MLD 978; Nek Amal v. Dr.Suhail Baluch and others 2017 MLD 711; 2000 SCMR 296; Anwar Hayat and others v. Durre Sameen and others 2012 CLC 1536 and Warraich Zarraj Corporation v. F.M.C. United 2006 SCMR 531 rel. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MUHAMMAD NAEEM ANWAR, JUSTICE:---.--- By this single judgment, I intend to dispose of C. Rs. Nos. 980-P,…
🔒
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