1985 PLP 1974 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ISHTIAQ and another — Petitioners Versus Haji FAZAL KARIM and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP 1974 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ISHTIAQ and another — Petitioners Versus Haji FAZAL KARIM and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 1974 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 1974 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 1974 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ISHTIAQ and another — Petitioners Versus Haji FAZAL KARIM and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mansoor-ul-Arfin, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Nizam Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Abdul Latif A. Shakoor, Advocate Supreme Court with A. Aziz Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 27th June, 1985.
- Mansoor-ul-Arfin, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Nizam Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Abdul Latif A. Shakoor, Advocate Supreme Court with A. Aziz Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
- 7.At this stage learned counsel for both the parries pray that this Court may appoint Mr. Abdul Sattar, Advocate as a Commissioner under the provisions of Order XXXII of the Supreme Court Rules to investigate and record evidence, if any, in respect of area and boundaries of the plot in question and submit a report whether the Jhuggis of the petitioners are located within the plot in question. Learned counsel have also filed an application in writing in this behalf. We allow this request in terms of the consent statement and order that the Commissioner shall submit his report by 30th September, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind at Karachi dated 9-12-1984 passed in Civil Revision No. 62 of 1980).
Art.185(3)--Misreading of evidence--Finding of fact by trial Court on basis of Settlement Map and report of local commissioner appointed by Court, affirmed in appeal and revision, challenged--Leave granted to consider inter alia whether there was any evidence at all on which reliance was placed by Courts below to prove said finding of fact--Local Commissioner also appointed in terms of consent statement of parties, to investigate, record evidence and submit his report to Supreme Court.
Judgment & Decree
ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, J.‑‑The dispute in this case is whether the Judgment in occupation of the petitioners fall within the area of 308 sq. yds. situated on plot No.396‑A, Artillery Maidan Quarters, Karachi, transferred to respondent No.1. This was the main issue in the suit filed by the respondent against the petitioners.
2. Learned trial Court held on the basis of Settlement Map and the report of the local Commissioner appointed by Court that the Judgment were located on the aforesaid plot. This finding was affirmed by the Additional District Judge and the petitioner's appeal was dismissed. Their revision application in the Sind High Court was also dismissed by the judgment dated 9‑12‑1984.
3. Mr. Mansoor‑ul‑Arfin, learned counsel for the petitioners, appearing in support of this petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of the High Court submits that there is no evidence at all to prove that the Judges are situated on the area of ‑308 sq. yds. allotted to the respondent and in this regard has referred us to the sketch prepared by the local Commissioner, the report made by him, his evidence and also the Settlement Map on which reliance has been placed by the Courts below.
4. The above submissions made by the learned counsel, amongst other, deserve consideration. We, therefore, grant leave to appeal. Security Rs.2,000. 5.Appeal will be heard on the present record but it will be open to the parties to file additional documents, if any. 6.Petitioners shall not be evicted from the disputed premises till the appeal is decided. 7.At this stage learned counsel for both the parries pray that this Court may appoint Mr. Abdul Sattar, Advocate as a Commissioner under the provisions of Order XXXII of the Supreme Court Rules to investigate and record evidence, if any, in respect of area and boundaries of the plot in question and submit a report whether the Jhuggis of the petitioners are located within the plot in question. Learned counsel have also filed an application in writing in this behalf. We allow this request in terms of the consent statement and order that the Commissioner shall submit his report by 30th September, 1985. M. I.??????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave granted.