1989 PLP 1377 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD YAQOOB and another‑‑Petitioners Versus CHIRAGH DIN‑‑Respondent Civil Petition No.379 of 1983, decided on 10th August, 1988.
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1377 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and javid lqbal, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YAQOOB and another‑‑Petitioners Versus CHIRAGH DIN‑‑Respondent Civil Petition No.379 of 1983, decided on 10th August, 1988. |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1377 (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 1989 PLP 1377 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and javid lqbal, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1377 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD YAQOOB and another‑‑Petitioners Versus CHIRAGH DIN‑‑Respondent Civil Petition No.379 of 1983, decided on 10th August, 1988.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Iqbal Ahmad Malik, Advocate Supreme Court (absent) 4 d Muhammad Aslam Chaudhary, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 10th August, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order, dated 25‑1‑193 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Civil Revision No.775‑D of 1982). ‑‑‑O.III, R.3‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑Counsel his authority‑ Decision of High Court was based on offer for making oath and acceptance thereof‑‑Prescribed oath was duly made‑‑Petitioner's side was unable to urge any point against decision of the High Court‑‑Contention regarding authority of the counsel of petitioners before High Court, raised in the petition would have no force because the counsel had such authority in accordance with the terms of the power of attorney‑‑Petition dismissed as without merit‑‑Leave refused.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑Leave to appeal has been sought by the plaintiffs side in. a suit for possession against the dismissal of their civil revision. The parties to the litigation are stated to be real brothers. The suit of the petitioners was dismissed by the trial Court. Their appeal failed. Their Civil Revision was dismissed in pursuance of the settlement between the parties. Notwithstanding the same, leave to appeal has been sought against the order of the High Court. The decision of the High Court is based on offer for making oath and acceptance thereof. The prescribed oath was duly made. Learned counsel for the petitioners was unable to urge any point. The contention regarding authority of the counsel of the petitioners before the High Court, raised in the petition for leave to appeal, also has no force because the A counsel had such authority in accordance with the terms of the power of attorney. There is no merit in this petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. A.A./M‑893/S Leave refused.