1999 PLP 404 (MLD)

In view of the foregoing, I do not find any merits in the injunction application which is hereby dismissed." Mr. Mahmood A. Qureshi. also referred order of the learned VIIth Additional District Judge, Karachi South, dated 25-5-1994/in appeal filed by the appellant against the order of First Senior Civil Judge referred hereinabove. Learned VIlth Additional District Judge rejected the appeal with the following observation:-- "In view of the above position of law and the reported case of Mrs. Dino Manekji Chionoy and 8 others v. Muhammad Matin in PLD 1986 SC Page 693 wherein it has been held that such appeal should not be entertained, nothing remains to be argued on merits or otherwise and to adjourn the case for such purpose. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed as the same cannot be entertained. There will' be no order as to costs. " Mr. Mahmood A. Qureshi has further contended Mst. Iqbal Firdous approached the Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh and letter was issued from the Office of Additional Commissioner to EP dated 29-8-1992 relevant portion of which reads as under:- "Heard both sister and brother. She is not aggrieved. If she has any grievance, she should remedy from Civil Court." That the appeal is time-barred. The learned counsel has referred evidence of Asif Ali Prosecution Witness Exh.5 who has stated in the trial Court that: "I know the accused Ferozuddin present in the Court since 1960. The disputed house situated in Jamnadas Building at Preedy Police Station Jurisdiction, belongs to accused Ferozuddin. " The learned counsel has also referred the cross-examination of Mst. Iqbal Firdous the complainant which is as follows: It is correct to suggest that a suit had already been filed by me regarding the flat, which was already decided in my disfavour and at present I have filed appeal against the order, which is pending." This piece of evidence clearly shows that the appellant has not stated correct facts and suppressed the facts of dismissal of appeal. The evidence of the complainant was recorded on oath, which apparently shows that complainant has no sanctity for oath. The documents produced by the respondents in trial Court in their statement show that Government of Sindh, Settlement Cell, Board of Revenue has issued transfer order in favour of Ferozuddin son of Azimuddin for the property which is the subject-matter of the present appeal. The flat was transferred by the Government of Sindh in favour of Ferozuddin and all payment were made by Ferozuddin. Naturally in the absence of any order of the competent Civil Court he is presumed to be the owner of the property and at the time of the incident possession of the premises was also with him. Mr. Suleman Habibullah, learned counsel for the A.-G. has supported the order of the trial Court. According to him the order is based on proper appreciation of the evidence done by the learned trial Court, the appeal is time-barred. He has referred provisions of section 417, Cr.P.C. which reads as follows: "Appeal in case of acquittal.--(1) Subject to the provisions of subsection (4), the Provincial Government may, in any case, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the High Court from an original or appellate order of acquittal passed by any Court other than a High Court. (2) If such an order of acquittal is passed in any case instituted upon complaint and the High Court, on an application made to it by the complainant in this behalf, grants special leave to appeal from the order of acquittal, the complainant may present such an appeal to the High Court. (2-A) A person aggrieved by the order of acquittal passed by any Court other than -a High Court, may, within thirty days, file an appeal against such order." The order was announced on 28-10-1995, application for supplying certified true copy of the order was filed on 24-9-1995, cost was deposited on 4-10-1995 and p copy was delivered on 8-10-1995 to Mst. Iqbal Firdous. Keeping in view the period of 30 days, the appeal could have been filed on 9-11-1995 whereas the same was presented before the Court on 22-11-1995 which is beyond the period of 30 days as prescribed by the law. I have heard Mst. Iqbal Firdous the appellant in person, Mr. Mahmood A Qureshi, learned counsel for respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. Sideman Habibullah, Advocate for A.-G. I have considered the material placed with the case and the evidence so discussed by the trial Court referred hereinabove by the learned counsel for the parties. Admittedly the dispute is between the sister and brothers regarding possession of the flat. The appellant did not succeed before the First Senior Civil Judge, Karachi South, resultantly the appeal of the appellant was also rejected by the 7th Additional District Judge. The facts of Civil appeal are not admitted by the complainant in evidence recorded by the E Court which shows that the appellant has no sanctity for oath and has not given, true facts in the evidence. The evidence recorded by the trial Court referred in f earlier part of this order shows that Ferozuddin is in possession of the property and the transfer order has also been issued in his favour by the Settlement Cell, Board of Revenue, Government of Sindh. Mr. Suleman Habibullah has rightly pointed out that the appellant could have presented appeal on 9-11-1995 but the same was filed beyond the prescribed period of 30 days and application for condonation of delay has not been filed with the appeal, Learned trial Court has discussed and analyzed the evidence very properly which does not call for any interference of this Court. The appeal is devoid of substance/merits which accordingly is dismissed. A.A./I-22/K???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal dismissed.