| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 1911 2020 SLD 1911 2020 MLD 1693 |
Sindh High Court
R.A. No. 38 of 2010, decision Dated: 18-05-2020, hearingDate : 03-03-2020
NAZAR AKBAR, JUSTICE
Abrar Hasan for Applicant.Syed Sultan Ahmed for
Respondent No. 1.Nemo. for
Respondent No. 2.
R.A. No. 38 of 2010, decision Dated: 18-05-2020, hearingDate : 03-03-2020
NAZAR AKBAR, JUSTICE
Abrar Hasan for Applicant.Syed Sultan Ahmed for
Respondent No. 1.Nemo. for
Respondent No. 2.
JUNAID AHMED SIDIQUIVSM. YAKOOB KHAN NIAZI AND ANOTHERS
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O.XX,R.5,O.XIV,Rr.1,2,O.XLI,R.31
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 8,42
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.XX, R.5, O.XIV, Rr.1, 2 & O.XLI, R.31---Suit for cancellation of lease and possession---Recording evidence of the parties after framing of issues---Dismissal of suit while deciding issue of maintainability without touching any other issues---Scope---Plaintiff filed suit for cancellation of lease and possession wherein issues were framed and evidence was recorded---Trial Court dismissed the suit while giving findings on issue of maintainability while treating it preliminary issue without deciding issues of facts which was upheld by the Appellate Court---Validity---Purpose of conferring power on the Court to first decide the case or any part thereof only on the issue of law was to save the time of Courts and litigants---Court for deciding a case on the issue of law should form a conscious opinion in the light of pleadings of the parties and give notice to the parties that in its opinion the case mighty be disposed of on the issues of law and it should try those issues first---Trial Court, in the present case, had neither consciously framed issue of law nor expressed its intent to dispose of the case on the issue of law---Even settlement of issues of facts had not been postponed and evidence of both the parties had been recorded---Once Court had consumed time in recording evidence then efforts were to be made to decide the case both on law points as well as on merit---Trial Court after completing trial should have passed on all the issues, in circumstances---Courts below had failed to appreciate the pleadings of the parties in correct perspective---Plaintiff had prayed for recovery of possession of suit property on the basis of registered title document and his suit was simple suit for recovery of possession under S.8 of Specific Relief Act, 1877---Plaintiff had not sought any declaration as to his entitlement to any legal character---Even defendant had not raised any legal objection with regard to bar to the present suit in terms of S.42 of Specific Relief Act, 1877---Dispute between the parties was with regard to entitlement to possession specific suit plot on the basis of title documents---Question of title of the…
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