1993 PLP 448 (CLC)
Mst. GULZAR BEGUM and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD GHAUS and 10 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1993 PLP 448 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Azad J & K |
| Bench Members | Khawaja Muhammad Saeed, J |
| Parties | Mst. GULZAR BEGUM and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD GHAUS and 10 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1993 PLP 448 (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 1993 PLP 448 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Azad J & K bench comprising: Khawaja Muhammad Saeed, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1993 PLP 448 (CLC) (Mst. GULZAR BEGUM and another‑‑‑Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD GHAUS and 10 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Yunus Alvi for Appellants.
- Raja Hasan Akhtar Khan for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 16‑‑‑Territorial jurisdiction‑‑‑Immovable property‑‑‑Suit for recovery or declaration of any right or interest in immovable property must be instituted in x; Civil Court of competent jurisdiction within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, property in dispute was situated‑‑‑Superior Court, however, by a transfer order can grant powers to a Civil Court to decide rights and interests in the property lying outside the jurisdiction of that Court‑‑‑Property in question, being immovable property, situated in Pakistan could not be adjudicated upon by a Civil Court in Azad Jammu and Kashmir for lack of territorial jurisdiction,
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD GHAUS and 10 others‑‑‑Respondents Civil Appeal No. 45 of 1991, decided on 23rd November, 1992. ‑‑‑‑S. 16‑‑‑Territorial jurisdiction‑‑‑Immovable property‑‑‑Suit for recovery or declaration of any right or interest in immovable property must be instituted in x; Civil Court of competent jurisdiction within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, property in dispute was situated‑‑‑Superior Court, however, by a transfer order can grant powers to a Civil Court to decide rights and interests in the property lying outside the jurisdiction of that Court‑‑‑Property in question, being immovable property, situated in Pakistan could not be adjudicated upon by a Civil Court in Azad Jammu and Kashmir for lack of territorial jurisdiction, Muhammad Yunus Alvi for Appellants. Raja Hasan Akhtar Khan for Respondents.