| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 1018 2023 SLD 1018 2023 CLC 895 |
Islamabad High Court
Civil Revision No. 67 of 2021, decided on 31st August, 2022. Date of hearing: 15th August, 2022. C.M.A. No. 9825 of 2021 (in Suit No. 1188 of 2021) and C.M.A. No. 9822 of 2021 (in Suit No. 1189 of 2021), decided on 24th October, 2022 Dates of hearing
BABAR SATTAR, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Revision No. 67 of 2021, decided on 31st August, 2022. Date of hearing: 15th August, 2022. C.M.A. No. 9825 of 2021 (in Suit No. 1188 of 2021) and C.M.A. No. 9822 of 2021 (in Suit No. 1189 of 2021), decided on 24th October, 2022 Dates of hearing
BABAR SATTAR, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Syed ALI ASIM JAFFARI and 4 others
VS
QAMAR ABBAS and 6 others
Law: Partition Act, 1893
Section: 8
Partition Act (IV of 1893)--- ----S.8---Suit for partition---Preliminary decree---Execution---Mesne profits---Entitlement---Petitioners were aggrieved of refusal of respondent to vacate portion of suit property in her possession, in the light of preliminary decree passed by Trial Court---Plea raised by respondent was that she had retained possession in lieu of partition of agriculture land still to be partitioned---Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court declined to deliver possession to petitioners---Validity--- Fact that agriculture land remained to be partitioned or sold had no co-relation to settlement and distribution of shares in relation to other properties that had formed part of partition suit---Preliminary decree was a final decree in relation to properties in relation to which respective shares stood distributed between co-sharers---Merely because it was a preliminary decree in relation to agriculture land that remained to be distributed and/or sold did not make such decree a preliminary decree in relation to properties, the distribution of which had already taken place and constituted a matter that required no further adjudication---High Court directed the respondent to hand over possession to petitioner and set aside orders passed by Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court---High Court declared that petitioners were entitled to receive rent from respondent to be determined by Executing Court for the period respondent declined handing over of the possession till such possession would be handed over---Revision was allowed, in circumstances. Adam Khan v. Mohammad Sultan PLD 1975 SC 9; Mst. Ilahi Noor v. Muhammad Din PLD 1977 SC 634; Muhammad Sualeheen v. Muhammad Siddiq Mazhar 1981 CLC 1039; Mst. Jamila Akhtar v. Custodian, Evacuee Property PLD 1996 Lah. 149; Shahid Ali v. Mrs. Aziz Fatima PLD 2010 SC 38; Muhammad Zulfiqar v. Additional District Judge (West), Islamabad PLD 2016 Isl. 91; re: Petition for letters of Administration of the property and assets of the late Syed Zahoor-Ul-Hasnain son of late Syed Amanat Hussain 1990 MLD 997; Ahmad Ali v. Noor Muhammad 1992 CLC 1921; Muqadar v. Mst. Roshan (2008 CLC 43 and Qamar Sultan v. Mst. Bibi Sufaidan 2012…
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