Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 1568 1996 SLD 1568 1996 CLC 2016
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No. 65 of 1966, decision dated:11-06-1996
CH. MUSHTAQ AHMAD KHAN, J
Dr. A. Basit for Appellant. Muhammad Rashid Chughtai and Ch. Attaullah for
Respondents

JEEWAN BAKHSH and others

VS

FAZAL AHMAD and 52 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Punjab Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1887)-------S. 113---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), 0.1, R.3 & S. 100---Partition of agricultural land by Revenue Court---Necessary parties ---Non-impleading of those persons who had purchased part of land in question, during partition proceedings---Effect---Application seeking partition was filed on 21-3-1956; mode of partition was settled vide order dated 10-8-1957 and order of partition was passed on 25-1-1958---Appellants objecting to partition, had purchased land out of joint Khata vide sale-deed dated 1-9-1956, mutation whereof was sanctioned on 4-6-1957, therefore, they were not recorded owners on the date on which partition proceedings had been initiated and notice had been issued to recorded co-owners of joint Khata---Appellants having purchased land during partition proceedings, no defect in terms of S.113, Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, could be found with partition proceedings on account of their non­impleading for their predecessor-in-interest had been admittedly impleaded as party thereto, who had contested partition proceedings and had been heard--­Finding rendered by First Appellate Court on that count being unexceptionable was maintained in circumstances. Allah Rakha and another v. Muhammad Yusuf and others PLD 1991 SC. 601; Abdullah and another v. Mian Tafazzul Hussain and another PLD 1961 BJ 58 and Wali and 2 others v. Manak Ali and 2 others PLD 1965 SC 651 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.XXII, R. 6---Punjab Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1887), S. 113---Suit against partition of agricultural land by Revenue Court---Necessary parties died before ultimate hearing in suit was concluded---Legal representatives of deceased persons were not impleaded within limitation prescribed by law---Suit thus, stood abated in toto and not only to the extent of share of deceased defendants--­Partial abatement would take place only if two decrees were not inconsistent and could independently stand---If suits against remaining defendants were decreed it would only be possible if order of partition as a whole was set aside for each co­sharer 4had right to get partition of every inch of joint property,…
🔒
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