| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1972 SLD 3033 = 1972 SCMR 100 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-3 of 1972, decided on 9th February 1972. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, Karachi, dated the 5th January 1972, in L. P. A. No, 209 of 1971),
Presented By: Sajjad Ahmad, Waheeduddin Ahmad and Salahuddin Ahmed, JJ
Fatehali W. Vellani, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by A. Aziz Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-3 of 1972, decided on 9th February 1972. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, Karachi, dated the 5th January 1972, in L. P. A. No, 209 of 1971),
Presented By: Sajjad Ahmad, Waheeduddin Ahmad and Salahuddin Ahmed, JJ
Fatehali W. Vellani, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by A. Aziz Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents.
NOORALI BANA AND 9 OTHERS-Petitioners
VERSUS
THE PROVINCE OF SIND THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF SIND & BALUCHISTAN, KARACHI AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O. XXXIX
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXIX, r. 1-Injunction temporary-Balance of convenience in favour of defendant and no irreparable injury likely to be caused to plaintiff-Court, held, justified in refining to issue temporary injunction. Date of hearing : 9th February 1972. ORDER WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-The Deputy Commissioner, Karachi, is reviewing the order of his predecessor dated the 1st April 1965 giving no-objection to the entry of the names of Mst. Nabat Khanu daughter of Saleh Mohammad and Mohammad son of Bana, in the register of Haq Qabza in respect of an area of 1280 acres of land in Deli Lal Bakhar (un-surveyed) owned and possessed by them. The proceedings are at the stage of recording evidence. The petitioners have filed a suit for declaration and injunction in respect of the above mentioned land. They have prayed that the Deputy Commis sioner be restrained from continuing with the proceedings. Along with the suit, the petitioners filed an application for injunction under Order XXXIX, rule 1, C. P. C. to restrain the Deputy Commissioner from exercising his suo motu power of review. This application was rejected. The petitioners challenged this order…