| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2013 SLG 1258 2013 SLD 1258 2013 MLD 569 |
Balochistan High Court
Civil Revision No. 225 of 2010, decision Dated: 21-12-2012. Hearing Date : 08-05-2012.
MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR, JUSTICE
Rauf Hashmi for Petitioner. Miss Iram Mahmood and Amanullah Tareen, Additional Advocate General for
Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
Civil Revision No. 225 of 2010, decision Dated: 21-12-2012. Hearing Date : 08-05-2012.
MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR, JUSTICE
Rauf Hashmi for Petitioner. Miss Iram Mahmood and Amanullah Tareen, Additional Advocate General for
Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
IRFAN BASHIR
VS
SINGER PAKISTAN LTD. AND 3 OTHERS
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 2(11),47(3),50
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----Ss.2(11), 47(3) & 50---Execution of decree against legal representatives of deceased debtor---Duty of court---Scope---Term "representative" as used in S.47(3), C.P.C. would include legal representative as defined in S.2(11) thereof as well as any person being representative-in-interest of a party to suit---Court would firstly determine that who would be legal representative of deceased debtor and then would proceed against such representative---Decree could be executed to the extent of property of deceased debtor having come into hands of a legal representative---Principles. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR, JUSTICE:---.--- The petitioner Irfan Bashir feeling aggrieved of the order dated 30th April, 2010 of District Judge, Quetta, whereby his application under section 12(2) Civil Procedure Code (C.P.C.) was dismissed, filed the instant petition contending therein that the trial court arrived to an incorrect conclusion, thereby held that the property of the deceased judgment debtor namely Shaukat Bashir was transferred in favour of his legal heirs, including him (petitioner). It was contention of the petitioner that there was no concept of surety in an execution proceedings, but the court below while treating him as surety, and erroneously proceeded with the matter, thereby committed illegality. Furthermore, the execution of decree was sought by the decree holder/respondent No.1 against a dead person, that too, even without bringing his legal heirs on record, and in absence thereof the decree was not executable. It was further contended that the brothers of the deceased judgment debtors were pressurized, and he (petitioner) being one of them, and an employee of a Government Department, was blackmailed, and in compelling circumstances he (petitioner) deposited an amount of Rs.150,000 (Rupees one lac and fifty thousand only). It was further contention of the petitioner that according to Christian Law he (petitioner) was not liable to pay the debt amount of his deceased brother not being his legal heir, as such the decree cannot be executed against him. The petitioner contended that through…
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