| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1993 SLG 873 1993 SLD 873 1993 CLC 935 |
Sindh High Court
KAMAL MANSOOR ALAM, J.
Muhammad Muzaffarul Haque for Plaintiff. Muhammad Yasin Kayani for Defendant. S.H. Kazilbash for Defendant
KAMAL MANSOOR ALAM, J.
Muhammad Muzaffarul Haque for Plaintiff. Muhammad Yasin Kayani for Defendant. S.H. Kazilbash for Defendant
MUHAMMAD ALI HASHMI--Plaintiff
VS
SYED SULTAN AHMED RIZVI and others----Defendants MUHAMMAD IQBAL vs MUHAMMAD SADIQ and 9 others
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---O.VII, Rr. 10 & 11---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 42---Suit for declaration---Maintainability---On facts disclosed in plaint, suit filed by plaintiff related to infringement of his valuable and legal rights by defendants--Suit, in circumstances could not be said to be barred under section 42 of Act, 1877 as contended by defendants---Plaint neither could be returned nor rejected as prayed by defendant. Burmah Eastern Limited v. Burmah Eastern Employees Union PLD 1967 Dacca 190 ref. ORDER This is an application under Order 7, Rules 10 & 11, C.P.C. filed on behalf of the defendants Nos.1 and 2 seeking the return of the plaint or its rejection. The learned counsel for the defendants Nos.1 and 2 submitted that the Plaint is liable to be returned to the plaintiff under Order 7, Rule 10, C.P.C. and/or deserves to be rejected under Rule 11 of that Order as from the statement in the plaint and the reliefs claimed therein the suit is barred by law. Elaborating his submissions he argued that the suit having been filed for declaration and injunction was barred by section 42 of the Specific Relief Act as it is neither in respect of entitlement to any legal character of the plaintiff nor to any right as to any property and on the point he referred to the case of Burmah Eastern Limited v. Burmah Eastern Employees Union (PLD 1967 Dacca 190). The learned counsel for the plaintiff disputed the contention of the defendants and stated that the suit was very much in respect of infringement of the right to property of the plaintiff inasmuch as the plaintiff as owner of Plot No.51-F/1, Block-6, P.E.C.H.S. Karachi, was entitled to the beneficial use thereof like other plot-holders. He stated that under the lease deed he had an undisturbed right to the use of 40 feet wide road in front of the plot. However, the defendants, inter alia, had unauthorisedly constructed a katcha mud and stone ramp on the said road just in front of the property of the plaintiff thereby not only narrowing the said road considerably but also threatening to damage the property of the plaintiff. In this regard he also referred to the Report submitted by 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