2008 PLP 1366 (CLC)
Dr. Syed HASSAN ALI through Attorney — Plaintiff Versus Mst. TAZEEN ZAHRA and another — Defendants
| Citation | 2008 PLP 1366 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Dr. Syed HASSAN ALI through Attorney — Plaintiff Versus Mst. TAZEEN ZAHRA and another — Defendants |
| Primary Law | Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 1366 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 1366 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 1366 (CLC) (Dr. Syed HASSAN ALI through Attorney — Plaintiff Versus Mst. TAZEEN ZAHRA and another — Defendants). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mr. S. Nasir Abbas, Advocate for the defendant No.2 request for 15 days time for filing the written statement. In view of the above, this application is disposed of with the direction to the defendants to file their respective written statement within 15 days.
- Serial No.3 Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that he has been enrolled as an advocate of the High Court and does not want to press this application and the same stands dismissed as not pressed.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 8, 42 & 54
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VII, R.11
Suit for declaration, permanent injunction, possession and damages
Main prayer of the plaintiff was in respect of a plot
Since plaintiff was claiming right in the property, said suit could not be summarily dismissed
Question whether the plaintiff was rightly or wrongly claiming the right in the property, could also not be adjudicated without providing opportunity to the parties to lead evidence in support of their respective claims
Order accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
NADEEM AZHAR SIDDIQI, J.
Vide order, dated 11-12-2006 and objection was raised with regard to maintainability of the suit. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that plaintiff is claiming the right in the property on the basis of some Gift executed by defendant No.2 and suit has been rightly filed on the original side of this Court. Learned counsel further submits that whether the claim of the plaintiff is proper or not cannot be adjudicated at this stage and plaint cannot be rejected. Mr. S. Nasir Abbas learned counsel for the defendant No.2 submits that in the suit plaintiff has claimed such relief, which cannot be granted by this Court and relief can only be claimed through Family Court. He further submits that plaintiff has also filed a suit for damages at London and is not entitled to claim any damages in this suit. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The main prayer of the plaintiff is in respect of plots situated at Karachi. Since plaintiff is claiming right in the property, thus suit cannot be summarily dismissed at this stage. The question whether the plaintiff is rightly claiming or wrongly claiming the right in the property can also not be adjudicated without providing opportunity to the parties to lead evidence in support of their case. In view of the above, the objection raised vide order dated 11-12-2006 is recalled. Serial No.5. By this application under Order VII, rule 11, C.P.C. by the plaintiff has prayed for rejection of the plaint. After hearing of the parties to some extent, the learned counsel for the defendant submits that for the time being he does not want to press this application and will file a fresh application after filing of written statement. In view of the above this application stands dismissed as not pressed with the permission to file a fresh application. Serial No.6 By this application, the plaintiff has prayed that the defendant may be directed to file written statement as required under the law. Mr. S. Nasir Abbas, Advocate for the defendant No.2 request for 15 days time for filing the written statement. In view of the above, this application is disposed of with the direction to the defendants to file their respective written statement within 15 days. Serial No.3 Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that he has been enrolled as an advocate of the High Court and does not want to press this application and the same stands dismissed as not pressed. Serial No.2 For the time being and subject to all just exception, this application is allowed. Serial No.7 Hearing of this application is to be taken up after filing of the counter affidavit and written statement by the defendants. H.B.T./H-11/K Order accordingly.