| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 846 2008 SLD 846 2008 CLC 1481 |
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No.346 with C.M. No.163 of 2007, decision dated: 12-02-2008
MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Revision No.346 with C.M. No.163 of 2007, decision dated: 12-02-2008
MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Haji FARID ULLAH KHAN and anothers
VS
Sardar INAYAT ULLAH KHAN and 13 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------S. 42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2---Suit for declaration---Grant of temporary injunction---Vacation of injunction---Trial Court summoned the defendant and after considering the material available on record, granted temporary injunction, prohibiting defendants from raising construction on the suit premises or changing its nature---Appellate Court, however, had vacated said injunction order---Validity---For the issuance of temporary injunction, existence of a prima facie case was not the only criterion unless other two ingredients, i.e. balance of convenience and irreparable loss, coexisted---Defendants had filed affidavits in the shape of an undertaking that they were raising construction at their own risk and cost; and in case the land was found to be owned by the plaintiffs, they would claim no improvement for the same---Filing of said affidavits in the shape of undertaking, had sufficiently protected the rights of the plaintiffs and in case the suit premises was found to be in the ownership of the plaintiffs, defendants would not be entitled to the costs of improvement; and they would hand over the peaceful possession along with constructed Abadi to the plaintiffs-Order of the Appellate Court below was perfectly sound, judicious and strictly in accordance with law which called for no interference. Zakiya Khatoon v. Roomi Enterprises 1995 SCMR 753 and Haji Shah Jehan Khan v. Aurangzeb Khan and another PLD 1995 SC 462 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. III, R.4---Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act (XXXV of 1973), S.41---Counsel and client---Appointment of counsel---Professional misconduct---When a counsel was engaged in a lis, it was his duty to appear and conduct the case and assist the court on behalf of his client in order to secure justice for him---Under the provisions of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 and Rules framed thereunder, Canons of Conduct had been prescribed for Advocates and any violation of those Canons, would amount to professional misconduct. Haji Faridullah Khan Petitioner No.1 in person. Malik Muhammad Bashir for petitioners…
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