| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1995 SLG 793 1995 SLD 793 1995 CLC 1850 |
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No. 27 of 1994, decision dated: 26th March; 1995
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J
Zafar Iqbal Khan for Petitioners. Muhammad Rafiq Khan for
Respondents
Civil Revision No. 27 of 1994, decision dated: 26th March; 1995
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J
Zafar Iqbal Khan for Petitioners. Muhammad Rafiq Khan for
Respondents
FAZAR ALI KHAN and 3 others
VS
GHULAM ALI KHAN and 9 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Co-sharer-------Possessory title ---Protection---Co-sharer in possession---Such co-sharer could not be dispossessed from joint property simply because she had denied title of plaintiff/co-sharer---Once defendant's status had been determined as that of co-sharer, she could never be dispossessed except by partition---Where decree for possession had been passed against co-sharer in possession, that decree was required to be modified to that effect---Plea that defendant lady had never claimed co-sharership in written statement and that she should not be given protection against dispossession; such plea was not plausible for regardless of pleas taken, when once defendant was concurrently determined to be a co-sharer, order of dispossession could not be passed against her until and unless partition of joint property had taken place---Courts must protect possessory title of co-sharer in possession. (b) Court Fees Act (VII of 1870)--- ----Sched. I, Art. 13-A---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Revision--Court-fee leviable on revision---Fee leviable on memorandum of appeal was liable to be affixed on revision being filed against appellate decree---Petitioner (defendant) was directed to affix court-fee of specified amount on memorandum of revision within thirty days failing which his revision would stand dismissed. (c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 115---Courts below had found defendant lady to be co-sharer---Findings of Courts below qua declaratory aspect that defendant was co-sharer was maintained in revision while Court's decree for possession was set aside---Plaintiffs were declared to be co-sharers in joint property but could not acquire possession of same without partition. JUDGMENT The present house measuring about five Marlas detailed in the original suit and situated within the limits of Lakki Meena Khel seems originally to have been owned by Shah Wali Khan who had two sons Ghulam Ali Khan and Akbar Ali Khan. Ghulam Ali Khan is alive while Akbar Ali Khan is dead and is survived by Mst. Bibi Zahida widow; Rashid Latif, Anwar Jehangir, sons; Mst. Samina Yasmeen; Mst; Zubaida, Mst. Fehmeeda, Mst.…
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