1985 PLP 1521 (CLC)
MUHAMMAD MUKHTAR and others-Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD JAVED and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP 1521 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Lone, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD MUKHTAR and others-Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD JAVED and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 1521 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 1521 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Lone, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 1521 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD MUKHTAR and others-Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD JAVED and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Naveed Shahryar for Petitioners.
- Shahid Hussain Kadri for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S.115, O. XXXIX, rr.1 & 2--Temporary injunction in suit for permanent injunction--Respondent having no objection if status quo to alienation of property in dispute ordered to be maintained without prejudice to his rights in main suit and case disposed of expeditiously--Stay granted accordingly and suit ordered to be finally decided by a definite date.
Judgment & Decree
In a suit for permanent injunction brought by the petitioners against the respondents, they moved an application for grant of temporary injunction. It was allowed by the learned trial Court. The respondents went in appeal and the learned Additional District Judge, who heard it, vacated the temporary injunction and dismissed the petitioner's application. They have now come to this Court under section 115, C.P.C.
2. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard. To avoid prolongation of this litigation, without prejudice to the respondent's rights in the main suit, their learned counsel has no objection if status quo as to the alienation of the property is ordered to be maintained till the decision of the suit, provided it is disposed of expeditiously.
3. The suit is stated to be at the evidence stage. Let it be finally decided by the 31st of May, 1985. The property in dispute shall not be alienated or disposed of in any manner by the respondents till the decision of the suit. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. M.Y.H. Stay granted.