Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115,1,2

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 12,42,54

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S.115---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Civil revision---Conversion of proceedings---Principle---Respondent raised objection to maintainability of revision application---Petitioners contended that high Court had jurisdiction to convert one type of proceedings into another---Validity---Revision was filed within one month of the passed by Lower Appellate Court and it was not hit by limitation or for that matter by doctrine of laches---High Court had power to convert one type of proceedings into another kind---High Court converted Civil Revision into a Constitutional petition---Objection was disposed of accordingly. Muhammad Akram v. DCO, Rahim Yar Khan and others 2017 SCMR 56; Capital Development Authority, Islamabad through its Chairman v. Khuda Bakhsh and 5 others 1994 SCMR 771 and Shamsul Haq and others v. Mst. Ghoti and 8 others 1991 SCMR 1135 rel. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss.12, 42, 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr.1, 2---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Interim injunction---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell, declaration and injunction was filed by respondents / plaintiffs---Interim injunction declined by Trial Court was allowed by Lower Appellate Court to respondents / plaintiffs---Validity---All three factors leaned prominently and conspicuously in favour of respondents / plaintiffs---Lower Appellate Court rightly granted interim relief to respondents / plaintiffs---All and any correspondence with respect to development of societies to and from regulatory authorities and administrative departments of government took place between deceased predecessor-in-interest of respondents / plaintiffs---In all such correspondence, it was deceased predecessor-in-interest of respondents / plaintiffs who was mentioned and acknowledged as a Developer---Names of petitioners / defendants were not mentioned anywhere in such correspondence---All amounts deposited by way of dues were deposited by deceased predecessor-in-interest of the respondents / plaintiffs and not petitioners / defendants---All three alive witnesses supported oral agreement to…

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