Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 1038 2004 SLD 1038 2004 SCMR 843
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No.944 L of 2002, decision dated: 4-07-2002.(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur dated 13 2 2002 passed in Writ Petition No. 1600 of 1993/Bwp.)
MUNIR A. SHEIKH AND MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL, JJ
Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for the Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents

MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others

VS

Mst. KUNDAN MAI and others

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) --S. 12(2) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.r85(3) Decree, setting aside of Plea of fraud Scope Decree was sought to be set aside on the ground that no fraud was played on the .Court which passed the decree Validity Not necessary that fraud iri obtaining decree should have been played on the Court which passed the decree but if a decree had been obtained through fraud between the parties inter se by concealment of true facts, the same could also be set aside Appellate Court while passing the order in revision petition ignored the fact that the filing of suit by the respondents would have served no purpose, for., consequence of setting aside of the decree was that the suit in which the same was passed would be deemed to be pending and the question of validity, existence or otherwise of Tamleek Nama was to be decided on merits inter se the parties Order passed by Trial Court in setting aside the decree was unexceptional in law and it had been rightly so held by High Court in its Judgment by Appellate Court was rightly set aside by High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction Leave to appeal was refused. JUDGMENT MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J. The petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur dated 13 2 2002, whereby Constitutional petition filed by the respondents has been accepted. 2. Land measuring 406 Kanals, 9 Marlas subject matter of this petition was owned by Haji Muhammad deceased who according to the petitioners gifted the same to them on 25 2 1987 through deed of Tamleek (Exh.D.1). A suit was filed by the petitioners against Haji Muhammad for declaration that they were the owners of the property in pursuance of the said Tamleek. The father of the petitioners was the attorney of Haji Muhammad who appeared in the suit and gave a consent for passing of the decree as prayed for, on the basis whereof consent decree was passed on 6 11 1998. Haji Muhammad died on 9 11 1988. The respondents who were the sons of Haji, Muhammad on 3 12 1988 filed an application under section 12(2), C.P.C. alleging that the said consent decree has been obtained through fraud, collusion…
🔒
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