Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 1128 2022 SLD 1128 2022 SCMR 852
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 997 of 2010, decision Dated: 14th February, 2022, Date of hearing: 14th February, 2022. (On appeal against the order Dated 15.09.2010 passed by the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan in R.F.A. No. 198 of 2003)
IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE, MUNIB AKHTAR, JUSTICE, SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
Rana M. Zahid, Advocate Supreme for Appellants Court (via Video-link from Lahore). Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 1(1-11). Ex parte for
Respondent No. 2.

RANA MUHAMMAD HANIF KHAN (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS.S

VS

SADDIQ KHAN (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS.

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 16,20

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)----Ss. 16 ,  20---Suit for recovery of compensation/damages---Ouster of jurisdiction of Civil Courts in Pakistan---Plaintiffs-appellants had admitted in the plaint that the property in respect of which the suit for rendition of accounts and recovery was filed, was situated in a foreign country; that the defendant-respondent was permanently residing in the foreign country and was a citizen there, and visited Pakistan occasionally---Amount claimed in the plaint was income generated from property inherited by the plaintiffs, which was situated in the foreign country---Nothing was available on record which showed that the defendant was actually and voluntarily residing in Pakistan when the suit in question was filed---Alleged breach of the agreement was purportedly on part of the defendant who at all relevant times resided in the foreign country---Alleged cause of action also arose in the foreign country when the plaintiffs found out about the money which they claimed was owed to them by the defendant---Even otherwise the presence of a defendant within the territorial jurisdiction of Pakistan does not ipso facto grant jurisdiction to Pakistani Courts on the touchstone of section 16 or 20 of the C.P.C. when the property in question was situated outside Pakistan---High Court had therefore correctly come to the conclusion that in light of the averments made in the plaint read with the requirements of sections 16 ,  20 of C.P.C., the Civil Courts of Sahiwal (in Pakistan) lacked personal and subject matter jurisdiction in the matter. Subject matter of the suit was situated in a foreign county (United States of America). This fact is admitted in the plaint of the appellants-plaintiffs that the property in respect of which the suit for rendition of accounts and recovery was filed, is situated in a foreign country. Section 16 of the C.P.C. clearly stipulates that all suits in respect of immovable property shall be filed in the Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the property in question is situated. The only exception to this rule is suits filed under section 16(c) of C.P.C. There is nothing on the record to…
🔒
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