Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 1209 2021 SLD 1209 2021 MLD 624
Sindh High Court
Civil Revision Application No. S-85 of 2010, decided on 3rdSeptember, 2020, Dates of hearing: 27th August and 3rdSeptember, 2020.
MUHAMMAD, JUNAID GHAFFAR, JUSTICE
Prem Chand R. Sawlani for Applicants.Ghulam Dastagir A. Shahani for
Respondent No.1.Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, Additional Advocate-General.

SAFDAR HUSSAIN JATT THROUGH ATTORNEY AND 3 OTHERSVSZAFAR ALI ARAIN AND 4 OTHERS

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 31

(a) Power of Attorney--- ----Authority/Attorney representing the party in the suit, powers of ---Objection of the respondent was that the power of attorney, annexed/placed on record by the petitioners before the High Court, was not in respect of civil revision-in-hand but he (attorney) was authorized to the extent/purposes of civil suit only---Held, record revealed that Attorney was appointed by the petitioners purportedly after the demise of their father (original defendant/owner of the suit-property)---Deed of power of attorney stipulated that petitioners had appointed their special attorney for them in the case while mentioning title of the civil suit---Proceedings of appeal and revision, in the present case, were apparently in continuation of the civil suit and the word case would not only include the civil suit but the adjudication of the case even thereafter---If the attorney was acting in support of the executants preserving their interests and where the executants had not come forward to object/dispute the authority so conferred, then the presumption would be that the attorney was competent to act in the interest of the executants---High Court dismissed the objection raised by the respondent and held that a competent person had filed revision petition on the behalf of the petitioners. First Dawood Investment Bank Limited v. Bank Islami Limited 2020 CLD 49; First Dawood Investment Bank Limited v. Bank Islami Limited 2019 SCMR 1925; Qadir Buksh and others v. Kh. Nizam-ud-Din Khan and others 2001 SCMR 1091; Muhammad Khaliq v. Abdullah Khan 1987 CLC 1366 and Muhammad Nazir v. Muhammad Yaqub 2003 SCMR 1246 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.XLI, R.31---Judgment passed by the Appellate Court in terms of O.XLI, R.31 C.P.C, 1908 without mentioning the points for determination---Scope and effect---Impugned revealed that though specific points for determination had not been so stated, however, the Appellate Court had given its cogent findings, after perusal of the material available on record and going through the record and proceedings of the Civil Court---If the Appellate Court had not framed points for determination in any case, then such would…
🔒
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