1989 PLP 1485 (SCMR)
WAZEER ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus ABDULLAH and others Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1485 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | WAZEER ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus ABDULLAH and others Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1485 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1485 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1485 (SCMR) (WAZEER ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus ABDULLAH and others Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A.Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 26th February, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 29‑10‑84, passed in Civil Revision No.1726/D of 1984) ‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑Declaratory suit‑‑Petitioner filed suit for declaration to the effect that he had not sold the land in dispute to the respondents through a sale‑deed which was fictitious and obtained with fraudulent manner and thus was ineffective against the rights of the petitioner‑‑Question raised by the petitioner that neither any sale‑deed was executed nor it was proved by the respondents by producing any marginal witness to the sale‑deed, was with regard to the question of fact, which had already been adjudicated upon by District Judge in appeal, who after appraisement of the evidence and all the relevant material on record had arrived at a correct conclusion‑‑High Court also rightly not considered it a fit case for any interference in fm din of the District Judge‑‑Leave to appeal against jurisdiction of High Court refuse
Judgment & Decree
USMAN ALI SHAH, J.‑‑This petition for leave to appeal has arisen from the judgment and order dated 29‑10‑84 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Civil Revision No.1726‑D/84, whereby a decree passed in a declaratory suit for possession in favour of the petitioner on 11‑4‑83 by the Civil Judge was set aside m appeal by the respondents before the Additional District Judge, Kasur vide his order, dated 12‑8‑
84. Thereafter, civil revision of the petitioner before the High Court, Lahore against the said order of the District Judge was also dismissed in limine. The petitioner had brought his original suit for declaration to the effect that he had not sold the land in dispute to the respondents through a sale‑deed, dated 4‑1‑1967 which was fictitious and obtained with fraudulent manner, this ineffective against the rights of the petitioner. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the judgments of the Courts below. We do not see any merit in this petition which deserves dismissal forthwith. The question raised by the learned counsel before us, is that neither any sale‑deed was executed nor it was proved by the respondents, by producing any marginal witness to the sale‑deed. This argument of the learned counsel is with regard to the question of fact, which has already been adjudicated upon by the learned Additional District Judge in appeal, who after appraisement of the evidence and all the relevant material on record had arrived at a correct conclusion. The learned High Court also rightly not considered it a fit case for any interference in the finding of the District Judge. The learned counsel, however, did not show us any legal defect therein, for consideration of this Court. The result is that this petition has no merit and is hereby dismissed. Leave refused. M.B.A./W‑56/S Petition dismissed.