2010 PLP 1933 (YLR)
Haji MULLAH DAD KARIM and others — Petitioners Versus Mir ASSA GUL and 22 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2010 PLP 1933 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Quetta |
| Bench Members | Mrs. Syeda Tahira Safdar, J |
| Parties | Haji MULLAH DAD KARIM and others — Petitioners Versus Mir ASSA GUL and 22 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 1933 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 1933 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Quetta bench comprising: Mrs. Syeda Tahira Safdar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 1933 (YLR) (Haji MULLAH DAD KARIM and others — Petitioners Versus Mir ASSA GUL and 22 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tahir Ali Baloch for Respondents Nos.1 to 22.
- Date of hearing: 18th December, 2009.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 11 & 115
During pendency of suit filed by the plaintiffs, defendants filed application under S.11, C.P.C. which was accepted by the Trial Court and Appellate Court and suit was dismissed on ground of res judicata--Validity
Point in respect of maintainability of suit being hit by S.11, C.P.C., was already decided by the Trial Court, recording findings in negative--Same court thereafter had no jurisdiction to again entertain the same question and take altogether a different view
Second order of the Trial Court was not only erroneous, but illegal being made without jurisdiction--Appellate Court did not consider said fact, which was specifically agitated before the Appellate Court
Both the courts had made an error which was required to be rectified
Orders of the courts below were set aside and suit stood restored and was remanded to the Trial Court to conduct proceedings in accor dance with law. Kamran Arshad Ch. for the Petitioners. Muhammad Aamir Rana for Interveners.
Judgment & Decree
MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR, J.
The petitioners being aggrieved of order dated 11-3-2006 of Qazi Pasni whereby their suit is dismissed being barred under section 11, C.P.C., while appeal filed by them was also dismissed by Majlis-e-Shoora through order dated 11-8-2006 preferred present petition with prayer for setting aside of both the orders while remanding of the case for decision on merits. It is their contention that the trial Court once decided the question of res judicata through order dated 23-1-2006, but while deciding application under Order I Rule 10, C.P.C. the question of res judicata was again decided and suit was dismissed through order dated 11-3-2006. The appeal filed against said order was also dismissed through order made on 11-8-2006. Both the orders are illegal and void. Once question of res judicata is decided by the trial Court, the same question cannot be taken twice by the Court, nor the suit can be dismissed that too without recording of evidence. As per record during pendency of suit, an application under section 11, C.P.C. was filed, which was decided by the trial Court through order made on 23-1-2006, wherein, the learned trial Court held that as the applicants have not filed any document from which it can be ascertained that a suit filed previously in respect of property in dispute, in present case, has already been decided, nor any copy of judgment is attached. The application was dismissed being without merits. But thereafter, some other applications for impleading parties were filed while deciding the same through order made on 11-3-2006 the trial court arrived to the conclusion that during course of arguments, none of the parties have denied that in present and previous suits, the property in question was the same and that the other suit is pending before Court of Majlis-e-Shoora Turbat, as such two suits in respect of same disputed property are not maintainable. The trial Court while rejecting the plaint directed the petitioners to approach the Court in previously instituted suit for impleading them as party. Feeling aggrieved of the same they preferred appeal before Majlis-e-Shoora, which was also dismissed through order dated 11-8-2006. The perusal of record reveals that the point in respect of maintainability of suit being hit by section 11, C.P.C. was already decided by the trial Court through order dated 23-1-2006 while recorded its findings in 'negative, therefore, the same Court thereafter has no jurisdiction to again entertain the same question and take altogether a different view. The second order of the trial Court dated 11-3-2006 is not only erroneous, rather illegal being made without jurisdiction. The learned Appellate Court did not consider this fact that same was specifically agitated before the Appellate Court. Both the Courts made an error, which is required to be rectified. In the circumstances without going into further merits of the case, the petition is accepted, impugned orders, dated 11-3-2006 of Qazi Pasni and dated 11-8-2006 of Majlis-e-Shoora Mekran at Turbat are hereby set aside. The suit stands restored and remanded to the trial Court to conduct proceedings in accordance with law. No orders as to costs. H.B.T./75/Q Petition accepted.