P L D 1991 Lahore 262 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN and others — Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD NAWAZ and others — Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1991 Lahore 262 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN and others — Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD NAWAZ and others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1991 Lahore 262 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1991 Lahore 262 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1991 Lahore 262 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN and others — Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD NAWAZ and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- M.R. Raza Khokhar and Syed Nazir Hussain for Respondents Nos.4, 8 and 11
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 70
Proof of fact by oral evidence
Mere oral self-serving statement of one of the defendants and a chance witness was insufficient to prove question of fact. [p. 265] A
S. 119
Party to exchange deprived of possession of land received
5. 119
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 100
Plaintiff, being party to exchange had failed to obtain possession of property, which he was entitled to receive in exchange
Courts below were right in decreeing possession of land in question to plaintiff
Lower Courts' approach to the record was not only correct and legal but their conclusions were also perfectly sound
Second appeal having no substance was liable to be dismissed. [p. 266] C
5. 119
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 2(12)
Party to exchange deprived of possession of property received in exchange
Entitlement to mesne profits even though he had failed to claim the same in relief
In suit for possession Court could award mesne profits under the head general relief
High Court in exercise of discretionary powers, modified judgments and decrees of Courts below to include relief for mesne profits accrued on land in question from the date of its decree, till actual delivery of Khas possession of land to plaintiff/decree-holder
Amount of mesne profits would be ascertained by Trial Court and made part of judgment and decree. [p. 267] D
Judgment & Decree
in exchange
Provisions of S.119, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, which provide remedy to a person who had been deprived of possession of land received in exchange were although inapplicable yet principles embodied in such provisions could be applied to cases in the Province of Punjab. [p. 265] B M.K. Ranganathan and another v. The Calcutta Tramways Co. Ltd. and others AIR 1956 Mad. 285 and Ch. Seetaramaswamy v. Narasingha Panda and others AIR 1975 Orissa 73 ref. (c) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)
5. 119
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 100
Plaintiff, being party to exchange had failed to obtain possession of property, which he was entitled to receive in exchange
Courts below were right in decreeing possession of land in question to plaintiff
Lower Courts' approach to the record was not only correct and legal but their conclusions were also perfectly sound
Second appeal having no substance was liable to be dismissed. [p. 266] C (d) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)
5. 119
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 2(12)
Party to exchange deprived of possession of property received in exchange
Entitlement to mesne profits even though he had failed to claim the same in relief
In suit for possession Court could award mesne profits under the head general relief
High Court in exercise of discretionary powers, modified judgments and decrees of Courts below to include relief for mesne profits accrued on land in question from the date of its decree, till actual delivery of Khas possession of land to plaintiff/decree-holder
Amount of mesne profits would be ascertained by Trial Court and made part of judgment and decree. [p. 267] D Jai Berham and others v. Kedar Nath Marwari and others AIR 1922 PC 269; Raghu Mahton v. Bulak Mahton and others AIR 1953 Pat. 289 and Munshi Banesh Prasad and others v. Jalpa Shankar Verma and others AIR 1960 Pat. 260 ref. Syed Ali Raza and Syed Zulfiqar Ali Bokhari for Apellants. M.R. Raza Khokhar and Syed Nazir Hussain for Respondents Nos.4, 8 and 11 Nemo for the Remaining Respondents. Date of hearing: 12th February, 1991.