1990 PLP 306 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD SULEMAN‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. AZIZ BEGUM‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1990 PLP 306 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SULEMAN‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. AZIZ BEGUM‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 306 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 306 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 306 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SULEMAN‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. AZIZ BEGUM‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Abdul Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanveer Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 10th June, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 12‑11‑1985, passed in Civil Revision No. 38/85). ‑‑‑S.42‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider that the mere fact that declaration had not been asked, shall not be made the basis for refusing the relief and that Supreme Court was empowered to mould and grant relief appropriate in circumstances of the case to declare the exchange as ineffective, void and illegal and also a prayer in alternative for possession of land given in exchange to petitioner.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S.42‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider that the mere fact that declaration had not been asked, shall not be made the basis for refusing the relief and that Supreme Court was empowered to mould and grant relief appropriate in circumstances of the case to declare the exchange as ineffective, void and illegal and also a prayer in alternative for possession of land given in exchange to petitioner. Sh. Abdul Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanveer Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 10th June, 1989. USMAN ALI SHAH, J.‑‑The petitioner, a plaintiff in a civil suit for the cancellation of exchange deed, seeks leave to appeal, whereby his original suit was dismissed by the trial Court on 18‑4‑1984, appeal thereof before the Addl. District Judge‑11, Okara also failed vide order dated 28‑11‑1984. His subsequent civil revision before the Lahore High Court, Lahore also got the same fate vide impugned judgment. Facts of the case are fully stated in the plaint but the mere fact that declaration has not been asked, shall not be made the basis for refusing the relief and this Court is empowered to mould and grant relief appropriate in the circumstances of the case to declare the exchange as ineffective, void and illegal and also a prayer in alternative for possession of the land given in exchange to the petitioner. Leave to appeal is granted. The petitioner shall furnish the security for costs in the sum of Rs.5,
000. Record of other suit to be summoned. All necessary parties including Falak Sher are to be impleaded. M.A.K./M‑1041/S Leave granted.