Case Details

Citation(s)
2024 SLG 2871 2024 SLD 2871 2024 CLC 311
Sindh High Court, Larkana Bench
Civil Revision No.S-42 of 2022, decided on 11th May, 2023.Date of hearing: 4th May, 2023.
Before Arbab Ali Hakro, J
Waqar Ahmed Chandio for Applicants. Rajesh Naraindas D. Kapoor for
Respondent No.1. Abdul Waris Bhutto, Assistant Advocate General for
Respondents Nos.2 and 3.

REHMATULLAH and others----Applicants

VERSUS

INAYAT KHOSO and others----Respondents

Law: Sindh Land Revenue Act, 1967

Section: 172

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 8,42

(a) Sindh Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----S.172---Jurisdiction of Civil Court---Scope---Dispute over ownership of agriculture land---There was no complete bar against civil Courts to entertain matters relating to agriculture land dispute---Sindh Land Revenue Act, 1967 ('Act') did not prohibit the Civil Court from determining the title of the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 to all land held jointly or from granting a declaration of joint ownership in disputed agricultural land---Plaintiff/respondent No. 1 was seeking relief for declaration regarding his share to the extent of 14-00 Acres from the suit land being the son of deceased and partition and separate possession of his share from the suit land---Applicants had denied his share in the suit land and refused to give him a share of the produce, therefore, the provisions of the Act did not support the disputation of the applicants that the suit of respondent No. 1 was barred---Apparently, Revenue Courts did not confer jurisdiction in partition proceedings where question of title was involved amongst the parties as envisaged in the provision of the Act---Suit of the respondent No. 1 was rightly decreed---Revision petition was accordingly dismissed. Nazir Ahmad and another v. Maula Bakhsh 1987 SCMR 61 and Messrs Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited (SNGPL) v. Messrs Noor CNG Filling Station 2022 SCMR 1501 rel. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 8 & 42---Suit for declaration and partition---Gift/hiba---Relinquishment of share---Proof---Father of the respondent No. 1 and applicants was owner of land measuring 92 acres (suit land), who passed away---Respondent No. 1 had claimed that applicants 1 and 2 were in possession of suit land, cultivating and enjoying the yield from the suit land, without paying respondent No. 1 his rightful share---Suit was decreed by the Trial Court in favour of respondent No. 1---Applicants filed appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court but same was also dismissed---Validity---Record showed that the findings of the appellate Court were based on the oral evidence of Revenue Officials and produced documentary evidence viz: mutation entries in the…
πŸ”’
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