Case Details

Citation(s)
SLG 2022 (2019) 126 SLD 2022 (2019) 126 PLJ 38
High Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeal No. 213 of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 28.01.2019.
RAZA ALI KHAN, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Lakhi Zaman, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Sakhawat Hussain Awan, Advocate Nos. 1 to 15, 18 & 19.

MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE AND 2 OTHERS

VS

MUHAMMAD ROSHAN AND 55 OTHERS

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 8,42,54

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

Section: 53,172

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.VII,XXXIXR.1,2,11

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----Ss. 8, 42 & 54--Civil Procedure Code, (V of 1908), O. VII R. 11 & O.XXXIX Rr. 1 & 2--Suit for declaration, perpetual injunction and possession--Rejection of suit--Appeal--Dismissed--Wrong entry of khewat number--Renumbering of revenue record--Opportunity of evidence--Challenge to--It is well settled principle of law that mere on ground that one of prayed remedy in plaint cannot be granted, suit cannot be dismissed while ignoring other prayers made in plaint--Matter of remedies has to be resolved by trial Court at time of final disposal of suit as to which of remedy has to be granted or refused and while picking one of remedies out of several ones, suit cannot be dismissed--Learned trial Court earlier rejected application filed under Order VII Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure, thereafter, obtained written statement--Proper course for trial Court was to frame issues and then provide opportunity of leading evidence to parties in support of their respective claim and thereafter decide controversy on merit--Learned 1st Appellate Court also failed to appreciate controversy and illegally maintained order of rejection of plaint passed by trial Court--It may also be stated here that learned First Appellate Court illegally held that suit is time barred because limitation is always considered as mix question of facts and law and same can be resolved after recording evidence of parties--Appeal was accepted. Land Revenue Act, 1967 (XVII of 1967)-- ----Ss. 53 & 172--Correction of entry--Jurisdiction--Declaration of right--There is no denial that Section 172 of Land Revenue Act, 1967 excludes jurisdiction of civil Court in matter relating to correction of any entry in record of rights, periodical record of right and Register of mutation, but whenever any such entry interferes with right of a person pertaining to land in question, he can approach to civil Court for declaration of his right in terms of Section 53 of Land Revenue Act, 1967. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: RAZA ALI KHAN, JUSTICE---.--- This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 26.10.2017 passed by the learned District Judge Jhelum…
🔒
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