1995 PLP 339 (SCMR)
Dr. MA. MAHBOOB and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Mrs. NAWAB BEGUM‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1995 PLP 339 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, JJ |
| Parties | Dr. MA. MAHBOOB and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Mrs. NAWAB BEGUM‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 339 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 339 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 339 (SCMR) (Dr. MA. MAHBOOB and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Mrs. NAWAB BEGUM‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Sharif, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Shabbir Ghaury, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Mushtaq Memon, Kazilbash, Advocates Supreme Court and Mrs. Majida Razvi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 10th June, 1992.
- AJMAL MIAN, J.‑‑‑By this common judgment we intend to dispose of the above two petitions for leave to appeal directed against the judgment dated 25‑3‑1992 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Sindh in High Court Appeals Nos. 158 of 1989 and 159 of 1989 filed by the petitioners/appellants against the grant of an injunction by a learned Single Judge of the above High. Court against the unauthorised construction, dismissing the same, we have converted the above petitions for leave to appeal into appeals and by consent of the learned counsel for the parties Mr. Muhammad Sharif, Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner and M/s. Mushtaq Memon and Mr. Kazilbash, Advocates Supreme Court for the respondent we dispose of the above appeals as follows:‑‑
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment and order dated 25‑3‑1992 passed by the High Court of Sindh in CAs. Nos. 158 and 159 of 1989): ‑‑‑‑O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185‑‑‑Grant of injunction by High `Court against unauthorised construction ‑‑‑Validity‑‑ Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal by consent of parties and disposed of in terms that injunction application would be deemed to have been disposed of in terms of consent order passed upon miscellaneous application in civil suit with clarification that appellants should not be entitled to carry out any construction work including finishing work in the disputed area referred to in the consent order‑‑‑Official assignee of High Court was appointed as Commissioner to visit the site and to demarcate and prepare plan of the area where appellants would not carry out any construction work so as to eliminate possibility of any future controversy.
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL MIAN, J.‑‑‑By this common judgment we intend to dispose of the above two petitions for leave to appeal directed against the judgment dated 25‑3‑1992 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Sindh in High Court Appeals Nos. 158 of 1989 and 159 of 1989 filed by the petitioners/appellants against the grant of an injunction by a learned Single Judge of the above High. Court against the unauthorised construction, dismissing the same, we have converted the above petitions for leave to appeal into appeals and by consent of the learned counsel for the parties Mr. Muhammad Sharif, Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner and M/s. Mushtaq Memon and Mr. Kazilbash, Advocates Supreme Court for the respondent we dispose of the above appeals as follows:‑‑ "That the injunction application shall be deemed to have been disposed of in terms of consent order dated 5‑10‑1988 passed upon the C.M.A. No. 4308/88 in Civil Suit No. 611 of 1988 with the clarification that the petitioners/appellants shall not be entitled to carry out any construction work including finishing work in the disputed area referred 'to in the above consent order dated 5‑10‑1988." In order to eliminate the possibility of any future controversy, by consent of the learned counsel for the parties we appoint. Official Assignee of the Sindh High Court as a Commissioner to visit the site and to demarcate and prepare a plan of the area where the appellants would not carry out any construction work as stated above. The petitioners /appellants shall pay a fee of Rs.2,000 to the Official Assignee. The above petitions/appeals stand disposed of in the above terms with the order as to no costs. AA./M‑2079/S Order accordingly.