SCMR 1991

1991 PLP 790 (SCMR)

Mst. ARASH NOOR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus Haji GHULAM RABBANI and 10 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 42-R of 1990, decided on 27th March, 1990.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ.
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1991 PLP 790 (SCMR)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ.
Parties Mst. ARASH NOOR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus Haji GHULAM RABBANI and 10 others — Respondents
Primary Law Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 790 (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 1991 PLP 790 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ..

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 790 (SCMR) (Mst. ARASH NOOR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus Haji GHULAM RABBANI and 10 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Representation

  • Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
  • Nemo for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 27th March, 1990.
  • Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment dated 16-12-1989 of the Peshawar High Court, Circuit Bench Abbottabad, in Civil Revision No. 3 of 1987).

S.115

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)

Contention that there was no justification for exercise of revisional] power for High Court as the case did not fall under any of sub-clauses of subsection (1) of S.115, C.P.C. and that judgment ran counter to law laid down in case reported as PLD 1990 SC 1 in so far as protection of rights and interest in land in dispute of female petitioners was concerned

Leave to appeal was accordingly granted. Ghulam Ali and 2 others v. Mst. Ghulam Sarwar Naqvi PLD 1990 SC 1 ref.

Judgment & Decree

Ghulam Ali and 2 others v. Mst. Ghulam Sarwar Naqvi PLD 1990 SC 1 ref. Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 27th March, 1990. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J.‑‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by the plaintiffs' side in a suit for declaration; against the acceptance by the High Court, of respondents' Civil Revision. The declaration sought was to the effect that the exchange and saledeed one after the other in favour of the defendants were the result of fraud and undue influence, collusion and further that these transactions were in reality without consideration. And thus were void and inoperative against the rights of the plaintiffs. The suit was decreed. The respondent's appeal was also dismissed. The High Court accepted the respondents' Civil Revision and set aside the concurrent findings of facts. Learned counsel has reiterated the points raised in this petition and has emphasized that there was no justification for exercise of revisional power for the High Court under section 115, C.P.C as the present case did not fall under any of the sub‑clauses of subsection (1) of section 115, C.P.C. He has also contended that the impugned judgment runs counter to the law laid down in the case of Ghulam Ali and 2 others v. Mst. Ghulam Sarwar Naqvi PLD 1990 S C 1 in so far as the protection of the rights and interest in the land in dispute of the female petitioners is concerned. Leave to appeal, accordingly, is granted. Security Rs. 5,

000. The appeal shall be prepared on present record with direction to the parties to file all those documents which shall be necessary for disposal thereof. H.B.T./A‑747/S Leave to appeal granted.