| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 1255 2010 SLD 1255 2010 YLR 247 |
Sindh High Court
Civil Revisions Nos. 17 and 31 of 2005, decided & hearing on 21-04-2009.
ARSHAD NOOR KHAN, JUSTICE
Abdul Sattar Chohan for Applicant (in Civil Revision No.17 of 2005). Ali Haider Dareshani for the Applicant (in Civil Revision No.31 of 2005). Muhammad Nawaz Soomro for
Respondents (in Civil Revisions Nos. 17 and 31 of 2005).
Civil Revisions Nos. 17 and 31 of 2005, decided & hearing on 21-04-2009.
ARSHAD NOOR KHAN, JUSTICE
Abdul Sattar Chohan for Applicant (in Civil Revision No.17 of 2005). Ali Haider Dareshani for the Applicant (in Civil Revision No.31 of 2005). Muhammad Nawaz Soomro for
Respondents (in Civil Revisions Nos. 17 and 31 of 2005).
PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY DEFENCE, ISLAMABAD AND ANOTHERS
VS
MUHAMMAD PARYAL THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS AND OTHERS
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O.VII,IX,Rr.8,9,11
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 42
Law: Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Section: 4,6,52
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.IX, Rr.8 & 9---Dismissal and restoration of suit---Filing of fresh suit on same cause of action---Validity---Plaintiff is precluded under O.IX, R.9 C.P.C. for filing of fresh suit on same cause of action---Whenever suit of plaintiff is dismissed for want of evidence of plaintiff and his witnesses, order for dismissal is passed under O.IX, R.8 C.P.C. and the same can only be set aside under O.IX, R.9 C.P.C. (b) Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)--- ----Ss. 4, 6 & 52---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss.42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VII, R.11---Rejection of plaint---Acquisition of land---Bar to jurisdiction of Civil Court---Plaint was rejected under O. VII, R.11 C.P.C. by Trial Court as land in question was acquired by authorities for public purposes but Lower Appellate Court set aside the order passed by Trial Court---Validity---Notifications under Ss.4 and 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, had already been issued and were available on record, therefore, civil suit challenging action of authorities in acquisition of land in question was not maintainable in view of S.52 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894---Lower Appellate Court did not exercise jurisdiction vesting in it legally and properly while setting aside order passed by Trial Court---High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction set aside the order passed by Lower Appellate Court and restored that of Trial Court---Revision was allowed in circumstances. Sikandar Ali and another v. Abdul Raheem @ Leemon 1996 CLC 1273 and Bashir Ahmed v. Moula Bux 1990 CLC 1241 rel. Mrs. Irene Wahab v. Lahore Dioeesan Trust Association 2002 SCMR 300 and Dhani Bux v. Ali Sher and others 2007 YLR 2134: distinguished. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: ARSHAD NOOR KHAN, JUSTICE:---.--- By this common judgment I intend to dispose off Civil Revision No.17/2005 Pakistan through Secretary Defence Islamabad v. Muhammad Paryal and others and Civil Revision No.31/05 Province of Sindh and others v. Gul Muhammad and others, as both the revision applications have arisen out against the common judgment dated 8-10-2005 passed by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge Khairpur and…
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