YLR 2009

2009 PLP 794 (YLR)

Dr. MUHAMMAD RIAZ — Appellant Versus Qazi AFTAB IQBAL and 5 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
F.A.O. No.111 of 2008, decided on 31st 3 October, 2008.
Honorable Judges
Ali Akbar Qureshi, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2009 PLP 794 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Ali Akbar Qureshi, J
Parties Dr. MUHAMMAD RIAZ — Appellant Versus Qazi AFTAB IQBAL and 5 others — Respondents
Primary Law West Pakistan Civil Courts Ordinance (II of 1962)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 794 (YLR)?

This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Civil Courts Ordinance (II of 1962) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 794 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ali Akbar Qureshi, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 794 (YLR) (Dr. MUHAMMAD RIAZ — Appellant Versus Qazi AFTAB IQBAL and 5 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

West Pakistan Civil Courts Ordinance (II of 1962)

Representation

  • Ch. Muhammad Rafique Warraich for Appellant.
  • Qazi Abdul Hameed and Muhammad Nauman Shamas Qazi for Respondent No.1.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 7

Jurisdiction of District Judge

Plaintiff in the case having fixed value of the suit for the purpose of jurisdiction of the Court, at Rs.25 lac, jurisdiction to entertain and decide the matter would vest with the District Judge.

Judgment & Decree

ALI AKBAR QURESHI, J.

Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the respondent, who is plaintiff in the suit titled as Qazi Aftab Iqbal and others v. Dr. Muhammad Riaz and others has fixed the value for the purposes of jurisdiction of court-fee at rupees twenty five lac and the jurisdiction to entertain and decide the matter vests with the District Judge. This has not been opposed by the learned counsel for the appellant. I myself have examined the contents of the plaint, wherein, the respondent/plaintiff has fixed the value for the court fee and jurisdiction Rs.25,00,000 (Rupees twenty five lac only), therefore, the jurisdiction to entertain and decide the matter vests with the District Judge. Office is directed to return the instant appeal to the appellant to file the same before the proper forum. H.B.T./M-52/L Order accordingly.