2008 PLP 1689 (MLD)
BIBI ZAINAB and another-,-Petitioners Versus AHSAN-UR-RASHEED and 10 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 PLP 1689 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | BIBI ZAINAB and another-,-Petitioners Versus AHSAN-UR-RASHEED and 10 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 1689 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 1689 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 1689 (MLD) (BIBI ZAINAB and another-,-Petitioners Versus AHSAN-UR-RASHEED and 10 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ashraf Mehmood and Muhammad Ali Abbasi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 115
Serious dispute existed in respect of properties of deceased between the parties which could not be solved through short cut proceeding
Applicants were claiming the properties of the deceased on the basis of oral gift, notwithstanding the fact that they were sharers in the said properties, while the other side was claiming on the basis of sharing; in such a situation, the only solution was that parties should file suit for administration of properties of the deceased.
Judgment & Decree
MUNIB AHMAD KHAN, J.
This revision has arisen in respect to the properties left behind by late Muhammad Adam Khan. According to learned counsel late Muhammad Adam Khan has left two wives with ten and twelve children from each wife. He submits that deceased has also left fourteen plots and other properties and both the parties are contesting for their rights. Mr. Muhammad Ali Abbasi submits that, the applicants are entitled to the properties of entire Muhammadi Market consisting of 14 plots as the same were gifted to the applicant by the deceased. This position is seriously challenged by the learned counsel for the respondent. Mr. Muhammad Ali Abbasi has also stated that previously a suit was filed in 1989 being Suit No. 104 of 1989 and the properties were taken over by the Official Assignee but instead of finalizing that matter, it remained pending and transferred to District Court on pecuniary jurisdiction and thereafter again returned by the Civil Court with the result that the matter still remained undecided and the suit has probably come to an end. It appears that there is serious dispute in respect to the properties of deceased Muhammad Adam Khan and it could not be solved through short cut proceeding as applicants are claiming the properties on the basis of oral gift notwithstanding the fact that they are sharers in the properties while the other side is claiming on the basis of sharing. In such a situation, the only solution is that parties to file suit for administration of property. Learned counsel for the' applicant submits that notwithstanding the fact the Officials Assignee was directed to take over the properties in his possession but the other side took the-possession of the properties. It has been intimated that 15 tenements are occupied and some properties are lying vacant. In such a situation all the tenants are directed to deposit rent with the Official Assignee and Official Assignee Co take over possession of vacant properties. The findings in this revision will be subject, to any other order, which may be passed in the suit for administration which may be initiated by the parties. With these observations the Criminal Revision Application is dismissed. H.B.T./B-38/K Application dismissed.