Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---- S. 115 --- Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of --- High Court under its revisional powers, could not interfere with finding of facts recorded by first Appellate Court, unless it was established that judgment of -Court suffered from jurisdictional error or some. patent illegality or material irregularity or was result of misreading or non-reading of evidence. M.S. Khatri for Applicant. War Hadi Shah for Respondent. Date of hearing: 16th September, 1990. JUDGMENT This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the Judgment, dated 25-10-1986 passed by the IVth Additional District Judge, Karachi (South) whereby allowing the appeal filed by the third respondent and setting aside the Judgment, dated 22-7-1986 and decree dated 11-8-1986 of the IXth Civil Judge, Karachi. The facts leading to the filing of the above revision petition are that the Petitioner filed Suit No.3108 of 1980 against the respondent No.3 and the remaining respondents. The case of the petitioner as set out in her plaint was that she is real daughter of late Haji Umer died in the year 1984, who left the property bearing No.LY-3/18 K.IA/10, Lyari Quarters known as Tar Muhammad Haji Umer Building. It was her case that she is one of legal heirs of Haji Umar and therefore she has a right to get the share from the said property. She prayed in the suit that the respondents be directed not to sell the property and also be directed not to get the rent of the said building. The respondent No3 resisted the suit by filing written statement wherein he admitted that the petitioner is daughter of late Haji Umer. He further stated that the petitioner accepted cash compensation and had surrendered her share in favour of Hashim, his father in view of compromise decree passed in Suit No.1323 of 1968. He pleaded dismissal of the suit. On the basis of the pleadings, the trial Court framed appropriate issues. The parties led evidence in support of their respective contentions. The trial Court on assessment of the evidence on record decided all the issues in favour of the petitioner and her suit was decreed in her favour against the respondents. The respondent No.3 being…