| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 4608 = 2026 SLD 4608 = 2026 SCP |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 260-P of 2022 (Against the judgment dated 09.02.2022, passed by the Peshawar High Court, D.I.Khan Bench in CR No. 32-D of 2014)
Presented By: Mr. Justice Shakeel Ahmad Mr. Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim
Syed Haziq Ali Shah, ASC.
Civil Petition No. 260-P of 2022 (Against the judgment dated 09.02.2022, passed by the Peshawar High Court, D.I.Khan Bench in CR No. 32-D of 2014)
Presented By: Mr. Justice Shakeel Ahmad Mr. Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim
Syed Haziq Ali Shah, ASC.
Civil Petition No. 260-P of 2022 (Against the judgment dated 09.02.2022, passed by the Peshawar High Court, D.I.Khan Bench in CR No. 32-D of 2014) ...Petitioner
VERSUS
Tariq Mansoor & others ...Respondent
Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Section: 115,III
Summary The respondents claimed ownership of property allotted under RL-II No. 175/Claim No. 514 and sought issuance of Robkar PB, mutation/effect in the revenue record, and injunctions against cancellation or transfer. The trial Court dismissed their suit, but the appellate Court decreed it subject to codal formalities. The Department’s Legal Advisor filed a civil revision before the Peshawar High Court, which dismissed it as non-maintainable on the ground that the Legal Advisor lacked specific authority to institute it. The Supreme Court set aside that ruling, holding that the Legal Advisor’s general mandate to defend all Revenue & Estate Department cases included taking necessary steps such as filing a revision arising from the same litigation. The case was remanded to the High Court for decision on merits. Core points The respondents sought declaration of ownership over the suit property on the basis of RL-II No. 175 and Claim No. 514 comprising 1250 units. They also sought issuance of Robkar PB, implementation of allotment in the record of rights, and injunctions against cancellation or third-party transfer. The trial Court dismissed the suit on 28.07.2011. The appellate Court allowed the respondents’ appeal and decreed the suit on 13.02.2014, subject to completion of codal formalities. The petitioners filed a civil revision before the Peshawar High Court, D.I. Khan Bench. The High Court dismissed the revision on 09.02.2022 as not maintainable, holding that the Legal Advisor lacked authority to institute it. The Supreme Court found that the appointment order gave the Legal Advisor a broad mandate to “undertake defence of all court cases related to Revenue & Estate Department.” The word “defence” was interpreted purposively and broadly; it is not confined to filing a written statement or conducting proceedings before the trial Court. A general authority to defend litigation ordinarily includes filing appeals, revisions, interlocutory applications, execution-related proceedings, and other steps necessary to protect the client’s legal rights. A revision under section 115 CPC is connected to and arises…