| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2009 SLG 501 2009 SLD 501 2009 CLC 513 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.10940 of 2008, decision dated: 25-11-2008
FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Writ Petition No.10940 of 2008, decision dated: 25-11-2008
FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
PARVAIZ and 4 otherss
VS
MUHAMMAD RAMZAN and 5 others
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 380,447,148,149
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 380,447,148,149
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 144
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------S. 144---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition--- Maintainability--- Alternate remedy--- Restitution of possession---Procedure---Act of court---Effect--- Petitioners were dispossessed from their land on the orders of Revenue authority but appeal was decided in their favour and order passed by Revenue authority was set aside, thus petitioners sought restoration of their possession---Validity---Petitioners were required to make application under S.144 C.P.C. to Revenue authority who, on receiving of application by way of restitution, were to place the petitioners in same position which was prior to the order passed by the authority---Court was empowered under S.144 C.P.C. to restore possession of the person from whom it was taken under an order---Act of court should not injure any person and such principle was also applicable to quasi judicial proceedings and order of tribunal---Concept of restitution was as old as the law itself and it would become operative the moment when order under which party to litigation was deprived of his possession was varied, modified or set aside---Court must remedy injury or wrong done to a party because of order of court---Procedure was provided under S.144 C.P.C., while power to order restitution was inherent in court and should be exercised whenever justice demanded---Present was not a case of restoration of possession but of restitution of possession because order of Revenue authority regarding dispossession was set aside by appellate authority declaring the same to be illegal and without jurisdiction---Remedy under S.144 C.P.C. was available to petitioners and they could move application under S.144 C.P.C. before Revenue authority who, on receiving application, would proceed in accordance with law---Petition was disposed of accordingly. Sajawal Khan v. Wali Muhammad and others 2002 SCMR 134; Ladha Khan and others v. Mst. Bhiranwan 2001 SCMR 533; Attaul Haque and others v. Additional District Judge and another 1992 MLD 1409; Barkat Ali v. Additional District Judge, Faisalabad and 5 others 2001 MLD 1044; Umat Ullah Begum v. Munawar Akhtar PLD 1996 Lahore 582…
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