P L D 1994 Peshawar 194 (PLP)
Syed AKBAR SHAH and 4 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Syed USMAN BACHA and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1994 Peshawar 194 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Abdul Karim Khan Kundi, CJ. and Muhammad Khiyar Khan, J |
| Parties | Syed AKBAR SHAH and 4 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Syed USMAN BACHA and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1994 Peshawar 194 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1994 Peshawar 194 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Abdul Karim Khan Kundi, CJ. and Muhammad Khiyar Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1994 Peshawar 194 (PLP) (Syed AKBAR SHAH and 4 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Syed USMAN BACHA and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Jehanzeb Rahim for Petitioners.
- Yusaf Riaz for Respondent No.1.
- Date of hearing: 20th April 1994.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 12(2) & O.IX, R. 13‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑‑‑Setting aside ex parte decree‑‑‑Essentials‑‑‑Person not being a party to such decree could not approach the same forum for setting aside the same‑‑‑Such person while challenging validity of a decree has to make application under S.12(2), C.P.C.‑‑‑Petitioner being not a party to ex parte decree, his application for setting aside same before the same forum was not maintainable‑‑‑Petitioner's application for setting aside ex parte decree having been dismissed by the appellate and the revisional forum on correct view of the law, his Constitutional petition against said decision was not maintainable.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL KARIM KHAN KUNDI, CJ. ‑‑‑This writ petition arises in the background of facts that Syed Usman Bacha respondent No. 1 has obtained an ex parte decree as against his father Syedul Abidin Bacha. Writ petitioners' father had allegedly purchased the suit property from Syedul Abidin Bacha prior in time to the ex parte decree. Their father made an application for setting aside of the ex parte decree. He, however, died pending the proceedings in application and petitioners were impleaded as applicants instead. The trial Court set aside the ex parte decree but the Additional Commissioner and the Additional Secretary Home upset the order of the trial Court and maintained the ex parte decree.
2. We posed to the learned counsel for the petitioners that a person not being a party to the ex parte decree cannot approach the same forum for setting aside of the ex parte decree. If a third person is, however, to challenge the validity of a decree he has to make an application under section 12(2), C.P.C. if the said provisions have been extended in application to PATH or by a separate suit as provided in section 12, C.P.C. unamended. We have found his application for the setting aside of the ex parte decree as not maintainable. We could not entertain his writ petition and resultantly the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. C.M. is also disposed of along. A.A./1568/P Petition dismissed.