| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1992 SLG 2141 1992 SLD 2141 1992 PLJ 405 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 1798 of 1991, dismissed on 1.7.1992. Date of hearing 11.5.1992
MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J
Ch. Muhammad Taimor, Advocate for Petitioners. Kh. Abdul Qaayyum, Advocate for
Respondents.
Civil Revision No. 1798 of 1991, dismissed on 1.7.1992. Date of hearing 11.5.1992
MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J
Ch. Muhammad Taimor, Advocate for Petitioners. Kh. Abdul Qaayyum, Advocate for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD ISMAIL and 3 others
VS
Malik MUHAMMAD SHAFI and others--Respondents
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 15
(i) Civil Procedure Code. 1908 (V of 1908)- —-O. XN1II R. IS-Site-Inspection of-Prayer for-Refusal of-Challenge to Co~:entic>a that appellate Court acted illegally in rejecting application for insp-ection of site-Exercise of power under Order XVIII Rule 18 of C.P.C. wa* in discretion of Court-If there was sufficient evidence on record for deciding matter in issue, inspection of property was not called for-Held: Order of appellate court in this respect is neither arbitrary nor capricious and cai^ foe no interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. [P.407JAB PLJ lv5 Lahore 178. PLD 1980 Kar. 108 and AIR 1923 Lahore 546 rel. ii» Eastintnt- —Right of easement-Claim of-Suit decreed and decree affirmed by first appellate covrt-Challenge to-It is well settled that easement of necessity can onK be claimed when it is demonstrated before court that without enjoyment of :ha; right, property for benefit of which, easement was being claimed, can no; be used at ail-Both lower courts have concurrently held that without use of passage in dispute, respondent No. 1 (plaintiff) shall have no access to his property-Held: Finding recorded by both courts below on questions of fact cannot be upset merely on ground that another view of evidence was possible on us reappraisal-Petition dismissed. [Pp.407,4d8409]C,D,E,FG PU 1991 SC 485 and 1991 SCMR 119 ref. JUDGMENT This petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 calls in question the decree of the Additional District Judge, Lahore, dated 17th July, 1991, affirming the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 19th Nov. 1989. 2. The back-ground in which this dispute has arisen is that originally Malik Badar Din was the owner of the land measuring 27 Kanals bearing Khasra Nos. 5083,…
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