2008 PLP 2157 (YLR)
Mst. PARVEEN ARA — Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH and 8 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 PLP 2157 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Amir Hani Muslim and Mrs. Yasmin Abbasey, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. PARVEEN ARA — Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH and 8 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 2157 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 2157 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Amir Hani Muslim and Mrs. Yasmin Abbasey, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 2157 (YLR) (Mst. PARVEEN ARA — Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH and 8 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Raja Qureshi for Petitioner.
- Ahmad Ali Pirzada, H.H.-G. for Respondents Nos. 1 and 5.
- Shahid Jamiluddin and Arshad Mubin Khan for Respondent No.2.
- Manzoor Ahmad, EDO for Respondent No.3.
- Kashir Paracha for Respondents Nos. 6 to 9.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Apprehension of danger to property during proposed construction
Petitioner had apprehended danger to her residential building due to construction being raised in adjoining plot of respondent
Nazir of the Court was asked to inspect the site who would take photographs of the status of residential building of the petitioner
Nazir after spot inspection had reported that proposed construction would not affect residential building of the petitioner
No objection had been filed to said report of Nazir of the court
Authority concerned had also filed comments in which it. was stated that construction was being raised in accordance with the approved plan with minor violations which appeared to be condonable
By consent of the petitioner, petition was disposed of with reservation by the petitioner that in case, if any damage was caused to the residential building of the petitioner on account of the proposed construction raised on the adjoining plot by respondent, the petitioner would be at liberty to file suit for damages and/or recovery of the same. Mansoorul Arfin for Abdullah Haroon Waqf.
Judgment & Decree
We heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and with their assistance have gone through the material available on record. By consent this petition is disposed of in the following terms.
2. The Nazir of this Court shall inspect the site today and shall take photographs of the present status of Krishna Mansion, particularly the portion from where the construction is to be raised. The purpose behind this inspection is that during proposed construction, raised by respondent No.10, the damage, if any, caused to Krishna Mansion can be quantified. The Nazir shall also make video-recording of the present status of Krishna Mansion. Nazir's fee for inspection is fixed at Rs.10,000 which shall be paid by the petitioner directly to the Nazir. The expenses of photographs and video-recording shall also be borne by the petitioner.
3. We have perused the reports of the Nazir, which are three in number. In the fact report of the Nazir, it has been stated that the construction, which is being raised in the adjoining plot by respondent No.10, does not affect the Krishna Mansion building, in which the petitioner is residing. No objection to this report has been filed.
4. Learned counsel for KBCA has also filed their comments in which they have stated that construction is being raised in accordance with the approved plan with minor violations which appears to be condonable.
5. Under the above circumstances, by consent this petition is disposed of with the reservation by the petitioner that in case if any damage is caused to Krishna Mansion building on account of the proposed construction raised in the adjoining plot by respondent No.10, the petitioner would be at liberty to file suit for damages and/or recovery of the same.
6. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms along with the listed items. H.B.T./P-35.K Order accordingly.