Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 1191 2004 SLD 1191 2004 SCMR 1551
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions Nos. 2534-L, 2536-L, 2547 and 2548-L of 2001, decision dated: 17-07-2002.(On appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 23-5-2001 passed in Civil Revisions Nos. 1420, 1421, 1422 and 1423 of 1995)
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY AND MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, JJ
Muhammad Sharif Chohan, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Ahmed Hasan Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents.

MUHAMMAD MUNIR and others

VS

Hafiz MUHAMMAD RAFIQ and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)----Art. 185(3)---Constitutional jurisdiction of Supreme Court---Concurrent findings of fact by the Courts below---Re-appraisal of evidence---Scope---Supreme Court in case of non-reading or mis-reading of evidence can set at naught the concurrent findings of fact but no such interference is made to disturb the finding of fact through re-appraisal of evidence. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S.115---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court under S.115, C.P.C.--¬Re-appraisal of evidence --Scope---High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction is not supposed to re-appraise the evidence and upset the finding of facts even if erroneous--Reversal of finding of fact by High Court in revisional jurisdiction is only possible in case of mis¬reading or non-reading of evidence or any irregularity in exercise of jurisdiction which can render the of subordinate Courts illegal. (c) Specific Relief act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Assailing of registered sale-deed--¬Separate civil revisions decided by High Court in one consolidated ---Concurrent findings of fact by the Courts below---Plaintiff sought declaration to the effect that the sale-deed was forged---Trial Court dismissed the suits and Appellate Court as well as High Court dismissed the appeal and revision respectively---Plea raised by the plaintiffs was that as separate revisions were filed before High Court, therefore, the same could not be dismissed with one consolidated ---Validity---Plaintiffs neither pointed out any mis-reading or non-reading of evidence on record nor any question of law involved in the case which was, left undecided by the High Court---Separate civil revisions arising out of civil suits which were decided through the consolidated could legally be disposed of through single as all material facts were common in all suits which were tried and disposed of together and thus the disposal of revision petition through the single caused no prejudice to the plaintiffs---Supreme Court declined to interfere with the passed by High Court on such technical grounds---Leave to…
🔒
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