Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 2175 2022 SLD 2175 2022 MLD 929

Civil Revision No. 683-D of 2009, decision Dated: 13th December, 2021.
AHMAD NADEEM ARSHAD, 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

SUBA though L.Rs and others

VS

Mst. HALIMA BIBI and others

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 2

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 14,120

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.XXIII, R. 2---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 14, Art. 120---Inheritance---Withdrawal of suit with permission to file afresh---Limitation, commencement of---Suit for declaration and permanent injunction/plaintiff being daughter of deceased instituted suit claiming her share from her fathers legacy and cancellation of sale deed of petitioner/defendant and certain mutations executed in his favour---Suit was dismissed and during pendency of her appeal, respondent had withdrawn the suit on ground of formal defects by seeking permission to file fresh suit vide order dated 31/01/2001---Fresh suit was dismissed by Trial Courts appeal was allowed by appellate Court---Petitioner contended that later suit was barred by time as earlier suit was instituted on 26/02/1992 when cause of action was allegedly accrued---Validity in her plaint specifically mentioned that cause of action had arisen one and half months before institution of that suit---Present suit was instituted after a period of nine years from previous suit---Limitation for instituting suit for declaration was not provided in Limitation Act, 1908, hence the same would be 6 years under residuary Art.120 of Limitation Act, 1908---Courts permission to institute fresh suit after withdrawal of earlier suit would save the fresh suit from bar as to institution of fresh suit on same cause of action---Once limitation started on same cause of action, the same would not discontinue---Plaintiff was bound by the law of limitation in the manner as if the first suit had not been instituted---Period consumed in form of earlier suit was to be counted and the same was not to be excluded for purpose of S.14 of Limitation Act---Revision petition was allowed and respondents suit stood dismissed. Mian Mumtaz Ahmad Zahid and Syed Hammad Raza Bokhari for Petitioners. Ch. Nazir Ahmad Jatt for Respondent No.1. Khush Bakht Khan, Assistant Advocate General Punjab for Respondent No.2. hearing date: 13th December, 2021. JUDGMENT AHMAD NADEEM ARSHAD, J.----Through this civil revision, the petitioners have called in question the legality and validity of judgment and decree dated 15.08.2009 passed by…
🔒
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