Law: Limitation Act (IX of 1908)

Section: 44 , 28 , 144

  Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ----Arts. 44 & S. 28---Adverse possession, suit for---No decree declaring plaintiff to be owner in possession of property on account of holding it adversely for requisite number of years could have been passed without allowing an opportunity of defence to a person, who claimed to be in possession of property in dispute. Limitation Act (IX of 15108)--- ----Art.: 144 & S.28---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of---Suit for adverse possession---Act of Court below in proceeding to decree suit for adverse possession, was contrary to all canons of justice and rules of fair play---Court below also disregarded requirements of procedural law---High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction, declared order of Court below illegal. Rab Nawaz Khan Niazi for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 29th June, 1991. JUDGMENT Civil Revision arises out of a civil suit instituted by plaintiff Usman, against Hameed Ullah Khan Zia, to have it found that he was owner-in possession of 12 Marlas Abadi land, on account of holding it adversely for the past 25 years, and, the defendant to the suit must not cause interference with his possession on it. Upon being served   defendant Hameedullah Khan Zia appeared in Court, and, submitted his written statement. It was stated in defence that the property in suit was purchased by Piao Khan from father of the plaintiff on 18-10-1942 and ever-since that time, he was in its actual possession. On the basis of the written statement submitted by the sole defendant to the suit, the trial Court rejected the plaint, under Order VII, Rule 11, Civil P.C. on 4-12-1977. Rejection of the plaint was appealed from, in the Court, learned District Judge, Mianwali. However, the appeal came to be heard by an Additional District Judge in that District. It appears that in the appeal filed, Piao…