| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 478 2019 SLD 478 2019 YLR 297 |
Sindh High Court
Civil Revision Application No. S-09 of 2016, decision Dated: 21-05-2018. Hearing Dated: 16-04-2018.
AMJAD ALI SAHITO, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Abdul Rehman Bhutto
Respondent(s) by: Naushad Ali Taggar Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, Addl. Advocate General
Civil Revision Application No. S-09 of 2016, decision Dated: 21-05-2018. Hearing Dated: 16-04-2018.
AMJAD ALI SAHITO, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Abdul Rehman Bhutto
Respondent(s) by: Naushad Ali Taggar Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, Addl. Advocate General
ASHFAQUE HUSSAIN LAHORI
VS
LAL BUX AND 7 OTHERS
Law: Sindh Waqf Properties Ordinance, 1979
Section: 2(e),6,7,11
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 92
Sindh Waqf Properties Ordinance (IX of 1979)--- ----Ss.2(e), 6, 7 & 11---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 92--- Application for appointment as Mutawali---Maintainability---Applicant had applied for appointment as Mutawali of the properties in question, on the basis of being real son of the previous Mutawali---Rejection of application--- Validity--- Properties in question were not registered under Sindh Waqf Properties Ordinance, 1979---Status of the properties in question though was that of 'Waqf Property' but no notification under S.7 of the Sindh Waqf Properties Ordinance, 1979 had been issued nor control and management of the same had been takenover by the Chief Administrator of Auqaf---Application under S.11 of Sindh Waqf Properties Ordinance, 1979 was not maintainable, particularly when the relief sought therein was in respect of appoint-ment of applicant as Mutawali according to Islamic Law---Remedy in respect of dispute about such Waqf Property, would be available before Civil Court under S.92, C.P.C.---Applicant would have the remedy of instituting a suit before Civil Court and application under Sindh Waqf Properties Ordinance, 1979, would be misconceived---Trial Court, in circumstances, had rightly dismissed the application by recording cogent reasons, which did not call for any interference by High Court. Muhammad Ramzan v. The State 2013 SCMR 737 and Zahid Farooq and others v. Anjuman Jamia Masjid and 4 others 1995 SCMR 1584 ref. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J.--- The instant revision application has been directed against order 17.02.2016 passed by learned 5th Additional District Judge, Larkana, in Civil Misc. Application No.01/ 2013 (Re.Ashfaq Hussain v. Lal Bux and others), whereby he rejected his said application. 2. The facts, in brief necessary for disposal of instant revision application, are that the applicant is son/legal heir of late Ali Gohar Khan Lahori, who expired on 10.09.2001, and he owned/possessed the property bearing C.S.Nos.278, 141 and 70 in Ward-A, Larkana, on which he got constructed a Masjid, he also owned property in C.S. Nos. 277 and 122, in Ward/Turner-A, Larkana, which was reserved for the purpose of…
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