| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 6835 2024 SLD 6835 = 2024 YLR 2738 |
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeals Nos. 128, 129 and 5 of 2022, decided on 10th May, 2024.
Before Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui and Ms. Sana Akram Minhas, JJ
Mukesh Kumar G. Karara and Sajid Ali for Appellants. Fayyaz Ahmed Metlo for
Respondents. Usman Farooq for Interveners (In High Court Appeal No. 129 of 2022). Abdul Jaleel Zubaidi along with Ms. Saima Imdad Mangi, Assistant Advocate General for the Province of Sindh.
High Court Appeals Nos. 128, 129 and 5 of 2022, decided on 10th May, 2024.
Before Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui and Ms. Sana Akram Minhas, JJ
Mukesh Kumar G. Karara and Sajid Ali for Appellants. Fayyaz Ahmed Metlo for
Respondents. Usman Farooq for Interveners (In High Court Appeal No. 129 of 2022). Abdul Jaleel Zubaidi along with Ms. Saima Imdad Mangi, Assistant Advocate General for the Province of Sindh.
SHAHEED SHAH INAYAT VILLAGE and others---Appellants
VERSUS
ASHIQ HUSSAIN VIGHIO and others---Respondents
Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)
Section: 42,54
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: VII,11
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------Ss.42 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VII, R.11---Suit for declaration and injunction---Rejection of plaint---Cause of action---Appellants/ plaintiffs were aggrieved of construction work on an amenity land---Trial Court rejected the plaint---Appellants / plaintiffs in their memo of appeal stated that they did not assert ownership over, nor sought to repurpose the amenity land for private or commercial use---Appellants / plaintiffs supported construction of designated public facilities but averred that such amenities should remain within the area allocated for them and not encroach upon adjacent village land---Held, that amenity land was designated for girls' college, public park and graveyard and neither formed part of adjacent village land nor could the latter lay any claim over it---Karachi Development Authority (KDA) had been tasked with the construction of the public park, which work was ongoing---Division Bench of High Court set aside the order passed by Judge in Chambers of High Court and restored the plaint---Appeal was allowed accordingly.Parveen Begum v. Shah Jehan PLD 1996 Kar. 210; Abdul Razzak Khamosh v. Abbas Ali PLD 2004 Kar. 269; Arif Majeed Malik v. Board of Goverors 2004 CLC 1029; Naseem-ul-Haq v. Raes Aftab Ali Lashari 2015 YLR 550; Al Meezan Investment Management Company v. WAPDA First Sukuk Company PLD 2017 SC 1; Jewan v. Federation of Pakistan 1994 SCMR 826; Raja Ali Shah v. Essem Hotel 2007 SCMR 741; Abdul Karim v. Florida Builders PLD 2012 SC 247; Abdul Karim v. Nasir Salim Baig 2020 SCMR 111; Ardeshir Cowasjee v. Karachi Building Control Authority 1999 SCMR 2883; Puri Terminal Ltd. v. Government of Pakistan 2004 SCMR 1092 and Supreme Court Employees Cooperative Housing Society v. Marshal Construction Management 2022 SCMR 366 ref.Date of hearing: 24th April, 2024.ORDERMS. SANA AKRAM MINHAS, J.---The Appellants of the instant HCA No.128/2022 and HCA No.129/2022 assail a common order dated 14.3.2022 ("Impugned Order") whereby plaint of Suit No.1598/2013 ("Suit 1598") and plaint of Suit No.888/2014 ("Suit 888") instituted by the Appellants (who were Plaintiffs in the Suits below) were…