| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 4156 2024 PLJ 552 , 2024 SLD 4156 |
Appellate Jurisdiction
Crl. P.L.A. No. 80-P of 2024, decided on 29.5.2024.
Present: Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Athar Minallah, JJ.
Mr. Waseem-ud-Din Khattak, ASC for Appellants (in C.A. No. 1471 of 2013). Mr. Rashdeen Nawaz Qasoori, Addl. AGP for Appellants (in C.A. No. 53 of 2014). Mr. Abdul Razzaq Raja, ASC for Appellants (in C.A. No. 187 & 188 of 2018). Hafiz Hafiz-ur-Rehman, ASC for Appellants (in C.As. No. 189 & 190 & 2018). Mr. Muhammad Akram Shaikh, Sr. ASC for Appellants (in C.A. No. 191 of 2018). Mr. Farooq Malik, ASC for Applicant (in C.M.A. No. 5008 of 2014). Mr. Rashdeen Nawaz Qasoori, Addl. AGP and Mr. Haroon Rasheed, Dy. Dir. FPSC for Federation: For FPSC. Mr. Aftab Alam Yasir, ASC for
Respondent No. 1 (in C.As. No. 187 & 189 of 2018). Dr. Khalid Ranjha, Sr. ASC for
Respondents No. 1-2 (in CAs No. 188, 190 & 191 2018). Mr. Abdul Razzaq Raja, ASC for
Respondents No. 5-9 (in CA 189 of 2018 and for
Respondents 7-10 in CA 190 of 2018 and for
Respondent No. 5 in CA 191 of 2018).
Crl. P.L.A. No. 80-P of 2024, decided on 29.5.2024.
Present: Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Athar Minallah, JJ.
Mr. Waseem-ud-Din Khattak, ASC for Appellants (in C.A. No. 1471 of 2013). Mr. Rashdeen Nawaz Qasoori, Addl. AGP for Appellants (in C.A. No. 53 of 2014). Mr. Abdul Razzaq Raja, ASC for Appellants (in C.A. No. 187 & 188 of 2018). Hafiz Hafiz-ur-Rehman, ASC for Appellants (in C.As. No. 189 & 190 & 2018). Mr. Muhammad Akram Shaikh, Sr. ASC for Appellants (in C.A. No. 191 of 2018). Mr. Farooq Malik, ASC for Applicant (in C.M.A. No. 5008 of 2014). Mr. Rashdeen Nawaz Qasoori, Addl. AGP and Mr. Haroon Rasheed, Dy. Dir. FPSC for Federation: For FPSC. Mr. Aftab Alam Yasir, ASC for
Respondent No. 1 (in C.As. No. 187 & 189 of 2018). Dr. Khalid Ranjha, Sr. ASC for
Respondents No. 1-2 (in CAs No. 188, 190 & 191 2018). Mr. Abdul Razzaq Raja, ASC for
Respondents No. 5-9 (in CA 189 of 2018 and for
Respondents 7-10 in CA 190 of 2018 and for
Respondent No. 5 in CA 191 of 2018).
PAKISTAN ENGINEERING COUNCIL through Chairman and others--Appellants
VERSUS
MUHAMMAD SADIQ & others--Respondents
Law: Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
Section: 302, 324, 427, 201 & 34
Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----S. 9--Punjab Pre-emption Act, (IX of 1991), Ss. 13 & 54--Civil Procedure Code, (V of 1908), S. 12(2)--Suits for possession and pre-emption--Decreed--Appeals--Allowed--Civil revision--Accepted--CPLA’s--Allowed--Compromise--Possession was handed over to decree holder--Execution petitions were allowed--Matter was resolved in favour of appellants--Statement of attorney regarding compromise in Court--No default of appellants in payment of zar-e-shufa--No objection regarding compromise was raised by attorney or his legal heirs--Applications u/S. 12(2) of CPC were allowed--Time-barred--Suit for permanent injunction against appellants were filed--Decreed--Remand in civil petition before Apex Court--Contempt application--Dismissed--Veracity of compromise--Topographical error--Appellants for all practical purposes were owners of said OS Kanals and 02 Marlas and claim of Respondents in that regard that Appellants were only entitled for land holding of 01 Kanal and 02 Marlas was misconceived, unwarranted, and uncalled for--It was Attorney who had hired counsel, on behalf of Abdul Qayyum, to represent their cases before different fora in earlier round of litigation--It was quite strange to note that said Haji Abdul Jalil subsequently, while appearing before trial Court made an unwarranted statement that he had neither appeared before a Court of law nor entered into a compromise before a Judge of High Court as a lawful Attorney--Whereas record clearly depicts that it was he who filed and signed compromise Application before High Court, and it was he who appeared before High Court, by entering into a compromise, with present Appellants--Abdul Qayyum passed away in year 1988, whereas compromise was entered in year 1979, and he never uttered a single word during his lifetime either with regard to veracity of compromise entered by his Attorney before Court or with regard to genuineness of Power of Attorney and it was only after his death that his legal heirs filed Applications under section 12(2) CPC questioning compromise or lesser payment of Zar-e-Shufa--Legal heirs kept mum for a number of years and, thereafter, agitated matter…
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