| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLD 1533 = 1991 CLC 830 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No.1389 of 1982, decided on 13th February, 1990.
Presented By: Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J
Muhammad Iqbal for Petitioner. Malik Ghulam Qasim Joya for
Respondent No.l.
Civil Revision No.1389 of 1982, decided on 13th February, 1990.
Presented By: Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J
Muhammad Iqbal for Petitioner. Malik Ghulam Qasim Joya for
Respondent No.l.
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Collector/Deputy Commissioner, Sargodha --- Petitioner
VERSUS
MUHAMMAD ALI and others --- Respondents
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 115 , 42 , 56
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---- OXXXIX, Rs. 1 & 2 & S.115--Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss.42 & 56--Temporary injunction, grant of --- Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of---Courts below after having applied their conscious mind to relevant material on record, had concurrently found that three essentials for grant of temporary injunction did exist in favour of plaintiffs --- In absence of any illegality, material irregularity or jurisdictional defect, concurrent findings of Courts below could not be interfered with in revisional jurisdiction of High Court --- Questions of jurisdiction and maintainability of suit of plaintiffs could properly by considered and decided at trial after framing issues and that it would be premature for High Court td hold that suit riled by plaintiffs was not maintainable or that Trial Court had no jurisdiction to entertain same. Muhammad Iqbal for Petitioner. Malik Ghulam Qasim Joya for Respondent No.l. Date of hearing: 13th February, 1990. JUDGMENT On 12-1-1981, Muhammad Ali and others, respondents, filed suit for declaration to the effect that they were owner in occupation of the suit property. Alongwith the suit they riled application for grant of temporary injunction restraining the defendants/petitioners from interfering with their possession of the suit property and also from alienating the same in any manner, till the decision of the suit. The application was allowed on 7-3-1981. The appeal filed by the petitioners/defendants was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Sargodha on 25-2-1982, hence this revision. Learned, counsel for the petitioner submitted that since, according to the entry in Revenue Record, the Provincial Government is lie owner of the suit property, therefore, the plaintiffs/respondents had no prima facie case in their favour, that under section 36 of the Colonization of Government Lands Act, and also under section 56 of the Specific Relief Act, the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit; that since Hasan Muhammad respondent No.2 is in the physical possession of the suit property,…