P L D 1954 Peshawar 52 (PLP)
MUSMAR and another‑Defendant‑Petitioners Versus KHAIRULLAH KHAN and others‑Plaintiffs‑Defendants Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1954 Peshawar 52 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUSMAR and another‑Defendant‑Petitioners Versus KHAIRULLAH KHAN and others‑Plaintiffs‑Defendants Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1954 Peshawar 52 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1954 Peshawar 52 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1954 Peshawar 52 (PLP) (MUSMAR and another‑Defendant‑Petitioners Versus KHAIRULLAH KHAN and others‑Plaintiffs‑Defendants Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mohtadullah Khan, for Petitioner.
- Peer Bakhsh Khan, for Respondents Nos. 6 and 8.
Headnotes / Summary
O XXII, Rr. 4 and 11‑ --Failure to implead in appeal all plaintiffs and defendants where decree is without any distinction against all defendants‑Appeal cannot proceed and is incompetent.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD SHAFI, ACTG. J. C.‑Khairullah Khan and eight others instituted a suit against nine persons including Mst. Spina and Zardad Khan defendants Nos. 8 and 9 respectively for the possession of 13 kanals 9 marlas of land out of 52 kanals 3 marlas, bearing Khasra No. 2808/713 to
721. Out of the defendants the suit was very hotly contested by Saad (Saaz) Gul and Musammar Khan defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in The learned Sub‑Judge (Allah Nawaz Khan) by his judgment, dated 11th of February 1952, granted a decree for the possession of the, suit‑land in favour of the plaintiffs against all the defendants with costs. There was an appeal against this decree by Musammar Khan alone in the Court of the Senior Sub‑Judge, Mardan, which was dismissed on merits on 1st August 1952, with costs. Musammar Khan has come up in revision to this Court. A preliminary objection has been raised that the appeal in the lower appellate Court as well, as the revision petition in this Court are both incompetent, and the petition should, therefore, be dismissed. The argument is that during the pendency of the suit defendant No. 9 had died. His four sons Hasham Khan, Misal Khan, Adam Khan and Zaman Khan, his two daughters Mst. Munara and Mst, Marghai and his widow Mst. Laila were brought on the record as his legal representatives. After the decision of the case when the appeal was filed in the Court of the Senior Sub‑Judge, Musammar Khan failed to implead Mst. Spina defendant No. 8, and Misal Khan and Zaman Khan, the two legal representatives of Zardad Khan as respondents in the appeal. Since these three persons were necessary parties to the case, and the decree had been granted against them just as it was granted against the other defendants, the appeal could not proceed in their absence at all. Where a decree has been made in favour of several persons against several defendants without making any distinction whatsoever, the appeal cannot proceed if all the plaintiffs and the defend ants are not impleaded in the case as appellants or as respondents. It consequently follows that the appeal before the learned Senior Sub‑Judge was incompetent, and should have been dismissed on that ground alone. Since the appeal before the learned lower appellate Court was incompetent, the judgment of the learned trial Court stands intact. The revision petition, therefore, must fail and is hereby dis missed with costs. Pleader's fee Rs.
20. Order announced. A. H. Petition dismissed.