Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 2068 2006 SLD 2068 2006 CLC 694
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No.2574 of 2000, heard on 14-02-2006.
MUHAMMAD MUZAMMAL 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

BASHEER AHMAD

VS

FAZAL DIN

Law:

Section:

(a) Oaths Act (X of 1873)-----Ss. 8, 9, 10 & 11---Dismissal of appeal as per offer of appellant, when respondent took oath on Holy Qur'an-Plea of appellant was that respondent was a man of unsound mind, and he could not file suit in his own name without next friend-Validity--Respondent had not raised such plea/objection in written statement---Appellant himself had called upon respondent during appeal to give an oath on Holy Qur'an which would be sufficient to conclude that respondent was not a man of unsound mind---Such bald statement of appellant would not be enough for holding respondent as a man of unsound mind-High Court dismissed revision in circumstances. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- --O. II, R.2---Constructive res judicata, principles of-Applicability-Non-maintainability of earlier suit for declaration of ownership in absence of further relief of possession---Withdrawal of earlier suit after filing of subsequent suit for possession---Held: bar contained in O.II, R.2, C.P.C., would not attract as earlier suit was not maintainable. Ghulam Nabi and others v. Seth Muhammad Yaqoob and others PLD 1983 SC 344; Saeed Ahmad and-3 others v. Tanveer Ahmad and another 1990 MLD 788; Ejaz Hussaina v. Abbas Ali 1993 CLC 2478 and Khaleeq Ahmad v. Tahir Saeed and others 1998 UC 740 rel. Riaz Ahmad Kasuri for Petitioner. Muhammad Ijaz Ahmad Lashari for Respondent. Date of hearing: 14th February, 2006. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD MUZAMMAL KHAN, J.--Instant civil revision assailed the judgments/decrees, dated 27-6-1997 and 17-10-2000 passed by the learned Civil Judge and the learned Additional District Judge, Kasur, whereby suit filed by the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents for possession was decreed and appeal of the petitioner was dismissed, respectively. 2. Succinctly, relevant facts are that Fazal Din deceased, predecessor-in-interest of the respondents, filed a suit for possession of land measuring 6 Kanals, 14 Marlas, duly detailed in the plaint with permanent injunction as consequential relief. It was pleaded in the plaint that the petitioner was tenant of the suit-land and he with a view to avoid his ejectment, forged the agreement to sell, dated…
🔒
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