2019 PLP 952 (YLR)

ALI BAIG, J.

Through the instant civil revision petition filed under section 115, C.P.C. the petitioner has challenged the impugned judgment/order dated 19-10-2018, passed by the learned Additional District Judge Gilgit, whereby the learned 1st Appellate Court has dismissed the civil first appeal of the present petitioner/plaintiff.

2. Precisely, stated facts of the case leading to the filing of this civil revision petition are that the present petitioner/ plaintiff brought a suit for perpetual injunction against the present respondents/ defendants in the learned trial court claiming that the petitioner/ plaintiff is owner of suit land/plot described in the heading of plaint, which was purchased by him from respondent/ defendant No.5 vide sale deed 15.10.2012. Now, the respondents/defendants are bent upon to forcibly take the possession of suit land.

3. The learned trial court after registration of Civil Suit No.15/2018, framed an issue regarding maintainability of suit and after hearing arguments on behalf of both the parties has rejected the plaint of the petitioner/plaintiff under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. vide order/ judgment dated 05-3-2018.

4. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment/order dated 05-3-2018, passed by the learned trial court, the present petitioner/plaintiff' had filed an appeal in the court of learned Addl. District Judge Gilgit, which was also dismissed by the learned 1st Appellate Court vide the impugned judgment dated 19-10-2018, hence this civil revision petition.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/plaintiff contended that the impugned judgment/order passed by the learned Ist Appellate Court is contrary to law and facts on the record of the case, as such the impugned judgment/order passed by the learned Ist Appellate Court is not maintainable and liable to be set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff further argued that the impugned judgments/orders of the learned Ist Appellate Court as well as judgment/decree passed by the trial court are a result of misconception and misinterpretation of the relevant provisions of law, hence the impugned judgment/order passed by the learned Ist Appellate Court as well as the trial court are not tenable and liable to be set aside. Concluding his arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff argued that by accepting this petition, the impugned judgments/orders of the 1st Appellate Court and the learned trial Court may be set aside and suit of the petitioner/plaintiff may be remanded back to the learned trial court for disposal on merits.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner/ plaintiff and perused the available record.

7. From perusal of record it transpires that the petitioner/plaintiff has sought only perpetual injunction in his plaint and has not sought declaration of his ownership in the suit, hence a consequential relief of permanent or interim injunction cannot be granted to the petitioner/plaintiff without a declaration about his ownership. In this connection, reference may be made to the reported judgment of Sindh High Court reported in 2002 CLC Page-571. Moreover, the disputed land has not properly been described neither in the head note of plaint nor in the contents of plaint as required under Order VII, Rule 3, C.P.C. It is admitted fact that Gilgit is a settled area, but the present petitioner/plaintiff has not disclosed any khasra Number, or mutation number of suit land in the plaint and the petitioner/plaintiff has also not annexed any revenue record with the plaint, hence the suit of the petitioner/plaintiff has rightly been rejected by the learned trial court under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C.

8. In view of above discussion, I do not find any merit in the instant revision petition, as both the courts below have not committed any material irregularity and illegality while passing its judgments warranting interference by this court in its revisional jurisdiction, thus this civil revision petition is dismissed in limine with no order as to costs.

9. However, the petitioner/plaintiff may file a fresh civil suit in the trial court after rectifying the flaws pointed out by the learned trial court. File. SA/1/GB Petition dismissed.