Case Details

Citation(s)
1995 SLG 1586 1995 SLD 1586 1995 PLD 256
Sindh High Court
Civil Miscellaneous Application No 5423 of 1994 in Suit No372 of 1986, Dated on 12th December, 1994.
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN ADIL KHATRI, JUSTICE
Manzurul Haque for Plaintiffs Abu Sharaf Ziauddin Muhammad for Defendant No.1. Muhammad Abdullah for Defendants Nos.2 and 3.

K. MARACAIR AND 3 OTHER --PlaintiffS

VS

ABDUL GHAFOOR AND 2 OTHERS ----Defendants

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) O.1, R 10(2) Impleading of party ejectment cases were filed by landlord/applicant against tenants, but were dismissed sap to Appellate Court Later on brother and other relative of original landlord took possession of premises by use of force and tenants/plaintiffs filed suit for 'recovery of possession of suit property and damage against landlord and his relative Original landlord who was made defendant in suit for recovery of possession of property and damage, filed written statement in which he had admitted that plaintiffs/tenants were dispossessed forcibly by his brother and other relative, but plaintiffs were not entitled to claim damages from him ¬Original landlord also asserted that defendants who were his brother and relative were in illegal possession of premises and also had trespassed on adjoining premises belonging to him Original landlord who was made defendant in suit filed by plaintiffs/tenants had filed application under 0.1, R.10 (2), C.P.C. to be impleaded as plaintiff in suit, contending that object of such impleading was to avoid multiplicity of suits Original landlord further asserted that tenants were in physical possession of premises owned by him and he was in constructive possession of suit property through plaintiffs/tenants, and by impleading himself as one of plaintiffs in suit, he would be able to seek remedy in suit for protection of his constructive possession Object of 0.1, R.10, C.P.C. was to ensure that all necessary and proper parties were before Court for proper adjudication of dispute raised therein and paramount consideration for impleading proper and necessary parties was to avoid multiplicity of suits, but it would not follow that avoidance of suits was to be only consideration which would weigh with Court while dealing with question of impleading of parties Court while deciding such question would be competent to refuse exercise of jurisdiction in favour of impleading applicant as plaintiff if any factor was found that could lead to inconvenience to any party or anomaly or that could introduce a new cause of action or change or enlarge scope of suit or claim raised ran counter to prayer in…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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