1991 PLP 970 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD KHAN and 6 others — Petitioners Versus Mst. GHULAM FATIMA and 12 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 970 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ. |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD KHAN and 6 others — Petitioners Versus Mst. GHULAM FATIMA and 12 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 970 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 970 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ..
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 970 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD KHAN and 6 others — Petitioners Versus Mst. GHULAM FATIMA and 12 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mirza Anwar Beg, Advocate Supreme Court and Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 10th November, 1990.
- Mirza Anwar Beg, Advocate Supreme Court and Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order dated 22-7-1990 of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, in W.P. No.315 of 1990).
O.VI, R.17
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art-185(3)
Revisional order of Court challenged in Constitutional petition
High Court having rightly held that revisional order arising out of civil litigation, could not be challenged in Constitutional petition, same was not open to challenge on any legal ground
Order passed by High Court was legal and proper
No point of law being involved, petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. Ghulam Hussain v. Malik Shahbaz Khan 1985 S C M R 1925; Muhammad Bakhsh v. Ghulam Hussain 1989 S C M R 443 and Muhammad Zahoor v. Lal Muhammad 1988 S C M R 322 rel.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑O.VI, R.17‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art‑185(3) ‑‑‑Revisional order of Court challenged in Constitutional petition‑‑‑High Court having rightly held that revisional order arising out of civil litigation, could not be challenged in Constitutional petition, same was not open to challenge on any legal ground‑‑‑Order passed by High Court was legal and proper‑‑‑No point of law being involved, petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. Ghulam Hussain v. Malik Shahbaz Khan 1985 S C M R 1925; Muhammad Bakhsh v. Ghulam Hussain 1989 S C M R 443 and Muhammad Zahoor v. Lal Muhammad 1988 S C M R 322 rel. Mirza Anwar Beg, Advocate Supreme Court and Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 10th November, 1990. ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.‑‑‑Leave to appear is sought against the order of the High Court dated 29‑7‑.1990. The facts, in brief, are that the respondents 1 to 7 filed a suit for declaration and possession against the petitioners and respondents Nos. 8 to
11. The petitioners moved an application under Order VI, Rule 17, C.P.C. seeking permission to amend the written statement. The trial Court vide Order dated 29‑3‑1989 disallowed the application for amendment. The petitioners' Revision Petition against the said order was dismissed by the District Judge on 17‑1‑1990. The petitioners then challenged the two orders in a Constitution Petition in the High Court. The petition was dismissed. The learned High Court observed that a revisional order arising out of civil litigation could not be challenged in the Writ Petition and relied upon Ghulam Hussain v. Malik Shahbaz Khan 1985 S C M R 1925; Muhammad Bakhsh v. Ghulam Hussain 1989 S C M R 443 and Muhammad Zahoor v. Lal Muhammad 1988 S C M R 322.
3. The order' of the High Court in the circumstances is not open to challenge on any legal ground. The order was legal and proper. No point of law is involved in this petition. The petition is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. A.A./M‑1486/SC. Leave refused.