2003 PLP 308 (MLD)

The Additional Registrar by his reference dated 4‑9‑2002 seeks ,.rider under Order 14(2) of the Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S.) for grant certified copy of the judgment and decree in the above suit on an application (C.M.A. No.6101 of 2002) moved by one Dr. Syed Raza Ali Gardezi as party to the original proceedings. The application is supported by personal affidavit of the applicant wherein it has been set forth that he is a resident of Pakistan Employees, Cooperative Housing Society and wants to prefer an appeal against the judgment dated 10‑5‑2002 and decree dated, 18‑5‑2002. The reference has been made after objections to the application were filed by Mr. H.A. Rehmani, learned counsel for the plaintiff, for the issuance of certified copies on the ground that the applicant has not disclosed either in the application or in his affidavit as to the nature of his interest in the subject‑matter. In support of his prayer for issuance of certified copies, Mr. Naeem‑ur‑Rehman, learned counsel for the applicant, has placed reliance on the case of Suleman Mala v. Karachi Building Control Authority (1990 CLC 448) wherein it was observed by the Division Bench of this Court that the property holders within the parameters of the scheme and even permanent residents could have either vested rights or, at the very least, some interest in the observance of the necessary features of the relevant claim. Placing reliance on Salman Mala's case (supra) he further contended that it is .not for this Court to examine the merits of the appeal to be filed as the matter as to the maintainability of the appeal and the nature of interest of the applicant in the subject‑matter are matters to be considered by the Appellate Court. Only a prima facie interest of the applicant is required to be established and in the present case the applicant is a permanent resident of the area and has an interest as already held by the Division Bench. In support of his contention learned counsel has also placed reliance on the case of Mirpurkhas Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Consolidated Sugar Mills Ltd. (PLD 1987 Karachi 225) and Fazal Din v. Lahore Improvement Trust, Lahore (PLD 1969 SC 223). Mr. H.A. Rehmani, learned counsel for the plaintiff, stressed that the present application is not maintainable; that the plaintiff has acquired vested rights after the orders have attained the finality which cannot be disturbed lightly and the prayer should be supported by specific material to establish existence of substantial rights or material on record justifying for grant of certified copies. In support of his contention learned counsel has placed reliance on H.M. Saya & Co. v. Wazir Ali Industries Ltd. (PLD 1969 SC 65). After hearing the learned counsel and the case‑law produced the view of the Division Bench is Suleman Mala's case (supra) pertaining to Tie rights of property holders within the parameters of the claims as well as permanent residents who have vested right has already been considered and upheld. In view of the nature of the facts of this case only the applicant required to show is that he is permanent resident of the area which follow existence of his right as already determined in the aforesaid case. As to the question of the finality of the orders, the vested rights of the plaintiff and the question of maintainability of appeal, into my humble opinion, these are the questions to be considered and decided by the Appellate Court and it would not be appropriate for this Court at the present stage while dealing with the application for grant of certified copies, to examine the details and merits of such appeal proposed to be filed. In view of the above a prima facie case has been made out by the applicant for grant of certified copies accordingly application is allowed and the Registrar's reference dated 4‑9‑2002 is disposed of in above terms.