| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2013 SLG 2326 2013 SLD 2326 2013 PLD 592 |
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeal No. 131 of 2011, decided on 6th August, 2013
MUSHIR ALAM, C.J. AND AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J
Malik Naeem Iqbal for Appellants. R.F. Virjee for
Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Ms. Mohammad Younus for
Respondents Nos. 4 to 17
High Court Appeal No. 131 of 2011, decided on 6th August, 2013
MUSHIR ALAM, C.J. AND AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J
Malik Naeem Iqbal for Appellants. R.F. Virjee for
Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Ms. Mohammad Younus for
Respondents Nos. 4 to 17
Khawaja MUHAMMAD ALI and 6 others
VS
SIR JEHANGIR KOTHARI TRUST through Trustees and 16 others
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 92,O.VII,R.11
Law: Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972
Section: 3
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 92 & O.VII, R.11---Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972), S.3---Intra-court Appeal---Suit under S.92, C.P.C.---Scope---Breach of any express or constructive trust created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature---Classes of persons who could initiate suit for such breach under S.92 of the C.P.C.---Expression "persons having an interest in the Trust" occurring in S.92, C.P.C.---Scope---Plaintiffs were tenants of a building owned by a Trust created for charitable purposes and had initiated suit under S.92, C.P.C. contending that the trustees had planned to dispose of and sell the Trust building---Plaint was rejected on the ground that under S.92 of the C.P.C. plaintiffs had no locus standi to file such suit---Validity---Suit in respect of Trust property could be brought either by the Advocate General himself, or by two or more persons having an interest in the trust provided that such persons had obtained the consent in writing of the Advocate General---Appellants/plaintiffs being merely tenants did not fall within the definition of "persons having an interest in the trust"---Position of tenants would not be disturbed even if the building was sold, except in accordance with law and they would simply cease to be tenants of the Trust and become tenants of the new owners---Suit under S.92 of the C.P.C. must be brought in a representative capacity on behalf of the public at large and not for the enforcement of a private or an individual claim or right---Plaintiffs, in the present case, were asserting individual rights which were personal to themselves and not for the benefit of the public at large---Plaintiffs/appellants were therefore, not "persons having an interest in the trust" hence had no locus standi to institute the suit---Plaint was therefore, rightly rejected---Intra-court appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Muhammad Irfan Azad v. Mst. Sultana Begum and 8 others PLD 1971 Kar. 91 and Begum Hafizunnisa Qureshi and others v. Shaikh Muhammad Hussain and others 2003 CLC 1156 ref. Fakir Shah and others v. Mehtab Shah Pir Bukhari Masjid Committee and others PLD 1989 SC 283 rel. (b) Civil Procedure…
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