Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 1858 2002 SLD 1858 2002 CLC 711
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No.701-D of 1995, decision dated: 30-03-2001
MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J
Noor Muhammad Awan for Petitioners. Zahid Hussain Khan for
Respondents

ZULFIQAR and others

VS

NOOR MUHAMMAD and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------S. 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Suit for permanent Injunction ---Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of---Objection as to maintainability of suit though was not specifically raised before the Courts below, but that being a legal objection could be raised at the time of revision before High Court. Akhtar Nawaz khan and others v. Danial Khan and others NLR 1995 SCJ 169 and Ali Gohar Khan v. Sher Ayaz and others 1989 SCMR 130 ref. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 8---Suit for possession of property by co-sharers--­Maintainability---No suit for possession simpliciter should be filed by co-sharers of suit-land who must have asked for partition of the land if they were aggrieved by any action of other co-sharers/defendants. (c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.11---Suit for permanent injunction ---Res judicata---Suit earlier filed by plaintiffs on same cause of action and with same prayer having been dismissed by the Trial Court could not be re-agitated by filing a second suit. JUDGMENT The dispute in this petition under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, arises out of a suit for permanent injunction filed by the respondents against the petitioners seeking a decree for permanent injunction restraining the petitioners from raising any construction or changing the nature of the land in Mauza Rooda, Tehsil and District Khushab. The suit was contested by the petitioners and from the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed by the trial Court, on which the parties led their evidence:-- (1) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the decree as prayed for? (2) Whether the plaintiffs have no cause of action; and locus standi to file this suit? (3) Whether the suit has been filed just to harass the defendants and the defendants are entitled to special costs under section 35-A of the C.P.C.? (4) Relief. 2. The learned trial Court by means of its judgment and decree, dated 7th of June, 1993 proceeded to dismiss the suit filed by the respondents, holding that they were estopped from filing the suit in view of the fact that the…
🔒
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