| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 1730 2000 SLD 1730 = 2000 YLR 1504 |
Lahore High Court
Presented By:
Presented By:
Law:
Section:
(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss.42 & 56---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Suit for declaration and permanent injunction--Concurrent findings of fact by both the Courts below-- Boundaries of property mentioned in registered sale deed---Value---Dispute was regarding issuance of notice by the respondent/ defendant whereby the petitioner/plaintiff was directed to remove her superstructure raised on the plot owned by her---Both the Courts below dismissed the suit of the petitioner/plaintiff on the ground that she had excess area in her possession and had encroached on municipal land---Contention by petitioner plaintiff was that such plea of encroachment was neither mentioned in the notice nor it was stated in the written reply filed by the respondents/defendants-- Validity---Where there was nothing on record to suggest that the boundaries stated in the sale-deed were not correct, such findings of both the Courts below could not be sustained---Both the Courts below having not only allowed the respondent defendant to walk out of their pleadings contained in their written statement but placed reliance on evidence which by all means was inadmissible, judgments and decrees of both the Courts below were set aside in revision. (b) Maxim- --- "Secondum allegata adprobeta---Meaning and applicability---Party could not be allowed to lead evidence in respect of plea not taken in the pleadings and even if such evidence was brought on record, the same could not be looked into---Where the defendant did not mention in his written reply anything about encroachment by the plaintiff but such plea was raised during evidence led by the defendant, admission of such evidence was in violation of the rule of "seeondum allegate adprobeta" in circumstances. Messrs Choudhary Brothers Ltd., Sialkot v. The Jaranwala Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Jaranwala and others 1968 SCMR 804 ref. (c) Practice and procedure--- ----Boundaries of immovable property-- Value---Where there was inconsistency between the area and the boundaries in a document and if the boundaries were definite then it were the boundaries which were to prevail. Fazal Hussain and another v.…