Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. XXVI, R. 9---Appointment of Local Commission---Dispute between parties was with regard to a wall which was dividing respective shops of the parties---Claim of respondent was that the wall was owned exclusively by him and was entirely situated within area owned by him--­Petitioners also, claimed ownership of the said wall---Local Commission appointed with consent of parties, after spot inspection submitted his report which was prepared by him on basis of site inspection in presence of parties who did not raise any objection to report of Local Commission---Courts, on the basis of report of Local Commission, accepted claim of respondent with regard to wall in dispute---Petitioners subsequently had contended that report of Local Commission was not clear and Court should have proceeded to record evidence to give its decision separately on each of the issues framed by the Court---Validity---Contention was repelled, because parties had themselves agreed to the appointment of a Local Commission and had also agreed that they would be bound by report submitted by the Local Commission---Even after submission of report, parties did not raise any objection to the same---Not necessary for the Trial Court to record evidence or to give findings on issues framed by it---Concurrent s and decrees rendered by Courts below on basis of report of Local Commission, were not open to exception. Khan Zahid Hussain Khan for Petitioners. M. Farooq Qureshi Chishti for Respondent. Date of hearing: 14th November, 2001. JUDGMENT This revision petition impugns the concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned Civil Judge, Joharabad, and of the learned Additional District Judge, Khushab, dated 12-3-1991 and 23-12-1991 respectively. 2. The respondent/plaintiff Muhammad Yasin owns a shop which is adjacent to a shop owned by the petitioners/defendants. It is the claim of the respondent/plaintiff that the wall dividing the two shops, is owned exclusively by him and is entirely situated within the area owned by him. On the other hand, the petitioners/defendants claim ownership of the said wall. 3. The parties were put to issue on the basis of their…

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