2013 PLP 1697 (YLR)

SHAH JEHAN KHAN AKHUNDZADA, J.

This revision petition has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 13-5-2009 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-I D.I.Khan, whereby on review application of the respondent, namely, Allah Bakhsh, the order and judgment and decree dated 24-4-2003 passed by Mrs. Zarqaish Sani, the then Additional District Judge-I D.I.Khan, was modified to the extent that the findings on issue No.5 and directions to the respondent to affix the requisite court-fee on appeal have been reversed.

2. This case has a chequered history. Abdur Rashid, plaintiff/petitioner, had filed a civil suit against the respondent Allah Bakhsh for possession through pre-emption in respect of the suit-land fully detailed in the plaint which was contested by the latter through filing written statement and the learned trial Judge after recording pro and contra evidence of the parties and hearing arguments of their learned counsel, decreed the same vide judgment and decree dated 5-4-2002. Aggrieved there from, Allah Bakhsh and others, defendants/respondents, filed an appeal which was accepted by the learned Additional District Judge-I D.I.Khan, vide judgment and decree dated 24-4-2003 and the appellants/respondents herein was directed to affix the requisite court fee on their appeal. This time, the plaintiff/petitioner, Abdur Rashid, felt aggrieved and challenged the aforesaid judgment and decree dated 24-4-2003 through a revision petition before this court, but could not succeed as it was dismissed through judgment and decree dated 14-10-2003. However, the respondents failed to comply with the earlier order of the lower appellate court dated 24-4-2003 by affixing the requisite court-fee on their appeal and thus the plaintiffs/petitioners filed a miscellaneous application before the learned Additional District Judge-I D.I.Khan for review of its judgment and decree dated 24-4-2003. On the other hand, the respondents also filed a similar application for correction of error in the said judgment and decree dated 24-4-2003 to the extent of affixation of court-fee and in alternative to make valuation of the suit/appeal for the purpose of court-fee with the prayer to extend the time for affixation of the same. The learned Additional District Judge-I D.I. Khan accepted the application of the plaintiffs/ petitioners Abdur Rashid and others, while dismissed the review petition of the respondents Allah Bakhsh and others. Feeling aggrieved from it, Allah Bakhsh and others; approached this court through a Revision Petition bearing No.84 of 2004 which was accepted vide judgment and decree dated 20-10-2008 and both the aforesaid applications were remanded to the appellate court for decision afresh after affording the parties an opportunity of hearing, who after doing the needful passed the impugned judgment and decree dated 13-5-2009. Hence the instant revision petition.

3. I have carefully gone through the record of the case and anxiously considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties.

4. Perusal of the record shows that the learned appellate court has properly appraised the entire evidence of the parties brought on file and thus reached to a correct conclusion which being based on sound reasons and right legal footings needs no interference by this court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under section 115, C.P.C., because the learned appellate court below has neither exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law, nor have failed to exercise jurisdiction so vested in it by law, nor in the exercise of jurisdiction has acted illegally or with material irregularity. Learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to point out any misreading or non-reading of material evidence in the impugned judgment and decree which is accordingly upheld.

5. As a result, I find' no merit in this revision petition which is hereby dismissed with costs. AG/200/P??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Revision dismissed.