Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)

Section: 8,42

Law: Limitation Act (IX of 1908)

Section: 28

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

(a)  Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)---

----Ss. 8 & 42---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 28 & First Sched., Art. 144---Suit for possession---Maintainability---Judgments at variance---Adverse possession--- Trespasser---Revenue Officer in demarcation proceedings found the petitioners as encroachers upon the property in dispute---Suit for possession instituted by the respondent/plaintiff was dismissed, but the Appellate Court allowed the appeal of the respondent/plaintiff and decreed the suit in his favour---Contention of the petitioners was that suit for possession was not maintainable being time barred and having been filed without seeking declaration of title---Validity---Respondent purchased property from Khasra No.746, however, possession was handed over to him from Khasra Nos.745 and 746 as the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners was owner in both the Khasras, thus, petitioners had not thrown any serious challenge to the title of the respondent and as such objection of the petitioners qua maintainability of suit for possession was without any force---Person is only obliged to seek declaration when somebody is interested to deny his legal right or character as ordained in S. 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877---Petitioners were claiming protection of their possession on the plea of "adverse possession", thus, when they had no title to the suit property, they could only be termed as "trespassers"---With the afflux of time illegal possession upon the property of the other, irrespective of howsoever long it is, would not extinguish the ownership of the actual owner and validate the possession of trespasser---Knocking out the respondent on account of limitation would amount to giving premium to the petitioners under the obsolete provisions of law i.e. S.28 and Art. 144 of the Limitation Act, 1908, which had already been declared as deviant to the Quranic Injunctions---Civil revision was dismissed, in circumstances.

Muhammad Iqbal v. Mati ur Rehman and others 2022 SCMR 859; Wazir Khan and others v. Qutab Din and others PLD 2009 SC 95 and Sultan Mahmood Shah through L.Rs. and others v. Muhammad Din and 2 others 2005 SCMR 1872 distinguished.