Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 9,42

Law: Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967

Section: 172(2)

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XX,R.18,115

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss.9 42---Suit for declaration and partition of immoveable property---Preliminary decree, grant of---Defendant impugned grant of preliminary decree in favour of plaintiffs, inter alia, on ground that Trial Court did not consider that suit for partial partition of property was not maintainable and did not take into account amounts invested by defendant in property---Validity---Preliminary decree was only meant for determination of shares of respective parties in common property whereas remaining questions could be agitated and culminated at time of final conclusion of such suit---Trial Court did not commit any error in ignoring stance of defendant regarding costs incurred in renovation of property as suit was still pending and any evidence in such regard could be decided by Trial Court keeping in mind continuous use of such property by defendant alone---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S.115---Revision---Issue / plea, if not claimed or pressed before courts below, where trial and appeal proceeded, then such issue could not be raised at stage of revision under S.115, C.P.C. Atta Hussain Khan v. Muhammad Siddique Khan and others, 1979 SCMR 630 and Kaura and others v. Allah Ditta and others 2000 CLC 1018 rel. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.XX, R.18---Punjab Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S.172(2)---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss.42 9---Suit for declaration and partition with respect to agricultural property---Exclusion of jurisdiction of Civil Courts in matters within the jurisdiction of Revenue Officers---Scope---Property, if same was agricultural in nature, then remedy for partition thereof lay solely with Revenue Hierarchy, and Civil Court lacked jurisdiction in such matter. Muqadar and others v. Mst. Roshan and others 2008 CLC 43; Qamar Sultan and others v. Mst. Bibi Sufaidan and others 2012 SCMR 695 and Muhammad Ayaz and others v. Malik Zareef Khan and others PLD 2016 Pesh. 8 rel. JUDGMENT CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD JAHANGIR, JUSTICE:---.--- In fact, late Inayat Ullah, predecessor-in-interest of the parties had contracted two marriages and three…

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