| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 2090 2023 SLD 2090 2023 YLR 1362 |
Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan
Writ Petition No. 9926 of 2021, heard on 20th October, 2021. Date of hearing: 20th October, 2021.
Before Anwaar Hussain, J
Tariq Zulfiqar Ahmed for Petitioner. Tariq Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhry for
Respondent No.1.
Writ Petition No. 9926 of 2021, heard on 20th October, 2021. Date of hearing: 20th October, 2021.
Before Anwaar Hussain, J
Tariq Zulfiqar Ahmed for Petitioner. Tariq Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhry for
Respondent No.1.
MEHMOOD IDREES---Petitioner
VERSUS
KHALID HUSSAIN and 2 others---Respondents
Law: Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act, 2012
Section: 7,8
Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act, 2012 (IV of 2013)--- ----Ss. 7 & 8---Mesne profits---Question of title---Respondent/plaintiff filed suit for partition of suit property as co-sharer of joint property in possession of petitioner / defendant--- Courts below directed petitioner/defendant to deposit interim mesne profit---Plea raised by petitioner/defendant was that respondent/ plaintiff did not have title in suit property---Validity---Discretion under S. 7 of Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act, 2012, was vested in Trial Court to determine mesne profits at the first date of hearing pending adjudication of the suit whereas S. 8 of Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act, 2012, had made it imperative upon Court to decide the issue to title or dispute before proceeding further in the suit---Such would be against the intention of the Legislature and object of Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act, 2012 to circumscribe or put a lid of S. 8 of Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act, 2012, on the discretion vested in Trial Court under S. 7 of Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act, 2012, by the Legislature---Purpose was that the Court considering facts of each case could direct deposit of interim mesne profits or deny the same pending adjudication of suit to safeguard a party not in possession---Such discretion was to be exercised in a judicial manner by Trial Court in each case depending upon prima facie positions of parties with respect to co-ownership---Respondent/ plaintiff was co-owner with equal share as per Jamabandi for the year 2001-2002, which had made it a prima facie case in favour of respondent/plaintiff---Lower Appellate Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction had rightly held that Trial Court failed in exercising its discretion in a judicial manner---If upon final adjudication of the matter, petitioner/defendant would succeed to establish his case regarding his real and sole ownership, amount so deposited as mesne profits could always be decreed in his favour---If petitioner/defendant would fail and order under S. 7 of Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act, 2012, was not in field, respondent/ plaintiff would…
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