1997 PLP 881 (SCMR)
Dr. MUHAMMAD YAQOOB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SIKANDAR and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1997 PLP 881 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Zia Mahmood Mirza and Raja Afrasiab Khan, JJ |
| Parties | Dr. MUHAMMAD YAQOOB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SIKANDAR and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 PLP 881 (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 1997 PLP 881 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Zia Mahmood Mirza and Raja Afrasiab Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 PLP 881 (SCMR) (Dr. MUHAMMAD YAQOOB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SIKANDAR and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Bakhsh, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 7th June, 1995.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgments/orders dated 22‑3‑1995 and 6‑4‑1995 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No. 3617/95). ‑‑‑‑O.XL, R.1‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Interim order of appointment of receiver passed by High Court subject to notice to petitioner‑‑ Validity‑‑‑Order in question was not final but was passed subject to notice to petitioner‑‑‑Application on which such order had been passed had not come up for hearing so far‑‑‑Petitioner was advised to approach High Court and canvass before it all his objections to order in question; `which he was seeking to raise before Supreme Court‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑O.XL, R.1‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Interim order of appointment of receiver passed by High Court subject to notice to petitioner‑‑ Validity‑‑‑Order in question was not final but was passed subject to notice to petitioner‑‑‑Application on which such order had been passed had not come up for hearing so far‑‑‑Petitioner was advised to approach High Court and canvass before it all his objections to order in question; `which he was seeking to raise before Supreme Court‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances. Ch. Muhammad Bakhsh, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 7th June, 1995. ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.‑‑‑Petitioner has filed this petition to seek leave to appeal against an order of a learned Single Judge of High Court dated 6‑4‑1995 passed on a miscellaneous petition moved in a pending writ petition whereby Tehsildar, Arifwala has been appointed as a receiver for harvesting, realization, management, protection and preservation of the standing. crops of sugarcane and wheat with further direction that the receiver shall have the crops harvested at the appropriate time for the benefit of the party, who ultimately succeeds in the litigation. Receiver has also been directed to keep full account of income and expenditure.
2. We find that the order impugned is not final. It was passed subject to notice to the petitioner. On our query, the learned counsel has stated that the Miscellaneous application on which the aforesaid order has been passed has not come up for hearing. so far. Petitioner should better approach the High Court and canvass before it all his objections to the impugned order which he seeks to raise before us. With this observation, this petition is dismissed. A.A./M-3140/S Leave refused.