Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 2576 2020 SLD 2576 2020 CLC 1746
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 1316 of 2000, decided on 20-01-2020, Dates ofhearing: 18th April, 26th May, 2017, 15th, 22nd February,2018, 11th, 19th March and 20th May, 2019.
MUHAMMAD FAISAL KAMAL ALAM, JUSTICE
Shahan Karimi for Plaintiff.Nazar Hussain Dhoon and Shahid Hussain for Defendant No.1.Imtiaz Ali Effendi for Defendant No.6.Akhter Hussain and Muhammad Masood Ghani for Defendant No.8.Muhammad Abdur Rahman for Defendant No.9.Nemo. for Defendants

DR. ABDUL RASHID PARACHA THROUGH HIS DULY CONSTITUTED ATTORNEYVSTHE DEFENCE HOUSING AUTHORITY THROUGH ADMINISTRATOR AND 8 OTHERS

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 3

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 27(b),42,54

Law: Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Section: 41

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 92

(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ----S.3---Suit for declaration and injunction---Maintainability---Limitation--- Scope--- Plea raised by defendant was that suit was not maintainable as it was barred by limitation--- Validity--- Limitation was a mixed question of fact and law, particularly where question of law was dependent on determination of other issues--- Plaintiff should not be non-suited unless either there was incriminating evidence against plaintiff that his claim was a time barred one or the issue could be decided on the basis of undisputed record. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 27(b),42 54--- Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S.41--- Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 92--- Suit for declaration and injunction--- Transfer by ostensible owner--- Bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration without notice--- Plaintiff claimed to be owner of suit property and alleged that transfer of the same in favour of defendants was result of fraud---Validity---Defendants produced conveyance deeds in support of their pleas that they had purchased respective subdivided plots through a valid registered instrument--- One of the defendants also produced lease in favour of other defendant issued by Defence Housing Authority--- Both defendants could not be contradicted by plaintiff who could not challenge documents exhibited by defendants which were Transfer order; approved building plan; completion certificate; and subsequent transfer order, all documents issued by public offices--- Such documents were public documents and their authenticity was not challenged, therefore, genuineness as contained in Art. 92 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, and the same was attracted to documents so exhibited--- Both defendants were bona fide purchasers for value without notice was relevant--- Such principle was developed by Courts while expounding S. 41 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 27(b) of Specific Relief Act, 1877--- Suit was dismissed in circumstances. Baja through L.Rs. and others v. Mst. Bakhan and others 2015 SCMR 1704; Shamshair Ali v. Mukhtiarkar (Revenue) and City Survey Officer and 2 others 2016 CLC Note 22; Shahnawaz Mallah and 2 others v. Raza Muhammad…
🔒
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