1989 PLP 1021 (CLC)
Haji MUHAMMAD SAMI and 2 others Applicants Versus SH UJA UDDIN Opponent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1021 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian, C J |
| Parties | Haji MUHAMMAD SAMI and 2 others Applicants Versus SH UJA UDDIN Opponent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1021 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1021 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ajmal Mian, C J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1021 (CLC) (Haji MUHAMMAD SAMI and 2 others Applicants Versus SH UJA UDDIN Opponent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑ ‑‑‑Ss.24 & 115‑‑Transfer of suits Two suits pending in two different Courts Application to transfer suits to one Court Allegation in both suits was that opponent had been causing nuisance to plaintiff Both suits were ordered to be tried by one Court for convenience of parties and the witnesses. Muhammad Ziauddin Qureshi for Applicants. Syed Saeed Akbar for Opponent.
Judgment & Decree
This is a transfer application of which I had issued pre admission notice to the respondent. Mr. S. Saeed Akbar is present in response to the above notice. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. It seems that the opponent has filed Suit No.633 of 1986 in the Court of 1st Senior Civil Judge at Karachi West, on the allegation that the opponent was committing nuisance by using certain machinery at his premises. Injunction was sought against the opponent. The above suit was transferred to the Court of IInd Senior Civil Judge at Karachi West, in which the opponent filed counter‑claim/ written statement averring therein that factually the opponent was committing nuisance and not the applicant. It appears that to the counter‑claim. the opponent had raised an objection as to the maintainability After that the applicant filed Suit No.1438 of 1988 in the Court of 1st Senior Civil Judge, Karachi West, against the opponent on the basis of the allegation contained in the applicant s above counter claim/written statement. This is an application filed by the applicant for the transfer of the above two suits to one Court. Mr. S. Saeed Akbar, learned counsel for the respondent, has pointed out that there is an order of the High Court for the disposal of the Suit No.633 of 1986 within a period of 3 months, whereas the applicant has filed the above suit recently and, therefore, the disposal of the above Suit No.633 of 1986 will be delayed. He has further submitted that there are separate causes of action in respect of the two suits and hence there is no A need of their being tried together. It seems that the defence of the applicant in the suit filed by the opponent is that factually the latter is causing the nuisance,) whereas the defence of the opponent in the suit filed by the applicant is that factually the latter is causing nuisance. In my view, it will be convenient to the parties and to the witnesses if both the two suits are tried together. I would, therefore, order that Suit No‑633 of 1986 may be transferred to the Court of 1st Senior Civil Judge, Karachi West, who will dispose of the same along with Suit No.1438 of 1988 within a period of 3 months as was already ordered by the High Court in relation to Suit No.633 of 1986. Both the parties shall appear before the 1st Senior Civil Judge, Karachi West, in the above two suits on 15‑11‑1988 without any notice from the Court. M.B.A./M‑632/K Order accordingly.