| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1998 SLG 1310 1998 SLD 1310 1998 CLC 757 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision Petiton No.2241 of 1989, heard on 22-10-1997
MIAN NAZIR AKHTAR, J
Allah Wassaya Malik for Petitioners. Khan Khizar Abbas Khan for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 and 13. Nemo for
Respondents Nos.6 to 12 and 23
Civil Revision Petiton No.2241 of 1989, heard on 22-10-1997
MIAN NAZIR AKHTAR, J
Allah Wassaya Malik for Petitioners. Khan Khizar Abbas Khan for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 and 13. Nemo for
Respondents Nos.6 to 12 and 23
MUHAMMADA and 3 others
VS
ALLAH BAKHSH and others
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------0. XXI, R.32, O.XLIII, R.1, Ss. 9, 104 & 115---Limitation Act (IX of 1908) Art. 181---Execution of decree---Earlier execution application was dismissed by Appellate Court on hearing of appeal (against ex parse decree) or the statement of defendants that they did not claim any right in the subject-matte. covered by ex parte decree---Plaintiff's subsequent execution application way dismissed by Trial Court as also by Appellate Court on plea of res judicata-Appeal/revision against---Maintainability---Trial Court having dismissed application for execution of decree on principle of res judicata, such order was not appealable either under O. XLIII, R.1 or under S. 104, C.P.C.---Plaintiffs had negligently filed appeal which was rightly dismissed by Appellate Court--Plaintiffs could not point out any illegality or material irregularity on part of Appellate Court in passing impugned order---Plaintiffs' present revision could not be treated as revision application against original order which had been passed for more than three years before the date when present revision was filed---Period negligently spent by plaintiffs before Appellate Court could not be condoned especially when there -was no application for condonation of delay explaining circumstances which led to institution of appeal before incompetent forum---Question of plaintiff's remedy at present stage was, however, left open as to whether he could file fresh application under OXXI, R. 32, C.P.C. or suit for mandatory injunction or suit for damages---Revision being barred by time was dismissed in circumstances. Ch. Muhammad Sharif v. Muhammad Ali Khan and others 1975 SCMR 259; Abdul Ghani v. Ghulam Sarwar PLD 1977 SC 102; Sadiq Mohy-ud-Din v. Secretary, District Allotment Committee 1981 SCMR 817; J.H. Joseph etc. v. Settlement Commissioner etc. 1982 SCMR 752; Mirza Muhammad Saeed v. Shahab-ud-Din and 8 others PLD 1983 SC 385 and Mst. Mahmooda Begum etc. v. Major Muhammad Ashiq 1984 SCMR 890 ref. JUDGMENT This revision petition arises out-of execution proceedings initiated by the petitioners for execution of the ex parte decree, dated 12-9-1977 passed by the learned…
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