2006 PLP 913 (SCMR)
Sh. SHAJAR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus Haji ABDUL MAJEED and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 913 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Actg. C. J., Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and M. Javed Buttar, JJ |
| Parties | Sh. SHAJAR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus Haji ABDUL MAJEED and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (b) Execution, (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 913 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Execution, (a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 913 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Actg. C. J., Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and M. Javed Buttar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 913 (SCMR) (Sh. SHAJAR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus Haji ABDUL MAJEED and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ihsan-ul-Haq Ch. Advocate Supreme Court and Zafar Iqbal Ch. Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Zaka-ur-Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehmood-ul-Islam, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 21st December, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from judgment dated 1-3-2000 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench passed in R.S.A. No.35 of 1996).
O. I, R.3 & O.XXIII, Rr.1(2), 2
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Suit without impleading necessary party
Sale of land by company as its original owner through its Director
Company not impleaded as party in suit
Dismissal of suit by all three Courts below
Prayer of plaintiff to allow him either to amend plaint or withdraw suit with liberty to file fresh suit on same cause of action after removing such inherent defect
Defendant objected to grant of such permission on the ground that suit had been found by all Courts to be barred by time
Decree passed in absence of original owner i.e. company, would cause injustice to same
Decree/order would not be executable against a person, who was not a party to proceedings
Supreme Court accepted appeal, set aside impugned judgments of Courts below and permitted plaintiff to withdraw suit and file fresh suit on same cause of action in accordance with law.
Order against a person not party to proceedings
Judgment & Decree
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.
This petition for leave to appeal is filed against judgment dated 1-3-2000 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner addressed arguments at length in support of petition. It was pointed out that the Panjnad Textile Mills was necessary party in the suit because originally land was owned by it and Nisar Mehmood son of Abdul Majeed agreed' to sell it to petitioner in capacity of Director of the company and in absence of company how suit was competent. On this, he stated that either permission be accorded to him to amend the plaint or permission be accorded him to withdraw the suit so he may file afresh suit on the same cause of action after removing this inherent defect.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents, however, opposed the request and stated that the suit of the petitioner was barred by time and in this behalf concurrent findings have been recorded by the learned High Court as well as by the First Appellate Court and the Trial Court, therefore, permission may not be granted him to withdraw the suit.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for both sides and taking into consideration the fact that the property was originally owned by the Panjnad Textile Mills, therefore, it was incumbent upon the plaintiff/petitioner to have impleaded it as party and in absence of the original owner decree passed shall cause injustice to it and such order would not be executable against a person who was not a party to the proceedings. Therefore, we accept the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner. As a result whereof petition is converted into appeal the impugned judgment dated 1-3-2000 as well as judgments dated 2-2-1998 and 15-7-1996 passed by the trial Court and First Appellate Court are set aside and permission is accorded to the petitioner to withdraw the civil suit and file fresh suit on the same cause of action in accordance with law. Parties to bear their own costs. S.A.K./S-98/SC Petition accepted.