1989SCMR287 (PLP)
Syed MUHAMMAD SHARIF SHAH — Petitioner Versus WALI MUHAMMAD and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989SCMR287 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ |
| Parties | Syed MUHAMMAD SHARIF SHAH — Petitioner Versus WALI MUHAMMAD and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 19601 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989SCMR287 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Consolidation of Holdings Ordinance (VI of 19601 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989SCMR287 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989SCMR287 (PLP) (Syed MUHAMMAD SHARIF SHAH — Petitioner Versus WALI MUHAMMAD and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Awan Muhammad Hanif Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 7th August, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 26-9-1982 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Civil Revision No. 1339-D of 1982).
S. 6--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Petitioner's-plaintiff s suit for declaration regarding consolidation proceedings dismissed by Trial Court and his appeal and revision also dismissed by Appellate Court and High Court, respectively--Points raised before High Court and repeated before Supreme Court, not such as to attract jurisdiction of Civil Court and petitioner wrongly filed a civil suit--Petitioner, after availing remedy before Board of Revenue had to file a petition in Constitutional jurisdiction before High Court--High Court however, on revision, had properly decided points of merits--Leave to appeal refused in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by a plaintiff against the dismissal of his civil revision by the High Court, which had arisen out of his suit for declaration regarding consolidation proceedings. The suit as dismissed. His appeal and civil revision also have been dismissed. He has now sought leave to appeal. The learned counsel has contended that the appellate and revisional judgments suffer from legal infirmity, and so far as the decision on the point of jurisdiction is concerned, it has wrongly been rendered against him. Learned counsel tried to show that, in the circumstances of this case, the Civil Court had jurisdiction in the consolidation matter brought before it. After hearing him, we do not agree. The points raised before the High Court and repeated before us are not such so as to attract the Civil Courts jurisdiction. The petitioner was wrongly advised to file civil suit. The remedy (after the Board of Revenue) was to file a petition in the Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. However, it also properly decided the points of I merits. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused. M.Y.H./M‑573/S Petition dismissed.