Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- O. XL, r. 1-Receiver, appointment of-Respondent found to be owner of disputed land and petitioners vendees not paying full price: originally agreed upon and instead cutting trees standing over land ­High Court, held, justified in appointing a receiver so as to protect property from destruction during pendency of revision petition-Leave to appeal declined.-[Receiver]. Vanibai and another v. Republic of Pakistan etc. P L D 1970 Kar. 42 ref. ORDER ANWARUL HAQ, C. J.-This petition seeks leave to appeal against an order made by a learned Judge of the Baluchistan High Court on the 15th of November, 1980, by which it was directed that Tashildar, Dhadar, shall take over the land in dispute as receiver, and maintain proper account of its produce, during the pendency of the respondent's revision petition in the High Court against the dismissal of their counter claim by the trial Court as well as by the Majlis-e-Shoora in appeal. 2. The dispute relates to the agricultural land situate in the Province of Baluchistan, which Ch. Khillu Ram, father of respondent No. 1 had agreed to sell to the petitioners by three agreements dated the 20th of August, 1963, 30th of September, 1963 and the 6th of January, 1964. As a dispute arose between the parties regarding the area owned by the vendor, the petitioners filed a suit on the 19th of March, 1972, for a declaration and permanent injunction before the Deputy Commissioner of the Kachhi District. The respondents resisted the suit, and also set up a counter claim for possession of the land in dispute, mainly on the ground that the petitioners had not carried out their part of the contract, namely, that they had not developed the land at a cost of Rs. 80,000 as envisaged in the third agreement. They also contended that petitioners had not paid entire sale price of Rs. 62,000 as originally agreed, and had instead paid only Rs. 12,000 as earnest money. The suit filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the learned Qazi of Lehri, and he also dismissed the counter claim for possession as asserted by the respondents. 3. It appears that the petitioners were content with the dismissal of their suit, but the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492