2003 PLP 1210 (SCMR)
PROVINCE OF SINDH — Appellant Versus RAHIM and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2003 PLP 1210 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Hamid Ali Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | PROVINCE OF SINDH — Appellant Versus RAHIM and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1210 (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 2003 PLP 1210 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Hamid Ali Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 1210 (SCMR) (PROVINCE OF SINDH — Appellant Versus RAHIM and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Suleman Habibullah, Addl, A.-G., Sindh and Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant.
- Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 25th September, 2001.
- IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---We have heard learned counsel for the parties at. length. However, during arguments when we confronted learned counsel for the respondents with the question that how the suit filed by the respondents was competent without impleading the District Forest Officer because record reveals that the property in dispute vests in the Forest Department. It is also pointed out to the learned counsel that in view of judgment of this Court in H.M. Saya & Co., Karachi v. Wazir Ali Industries Ltd., Karachi and others (PLD 1969 SC 65) as to how the appeal filed by Forest Officer before the District Judge was not competent and what illegality or irregularity was committed by the learned District Judge in entertaining/allowing the appeal filed in view of the law laid down by this Court in the judgment referred above and for such circumstances whether there was any occasion for the learned High Court to exercise jurisdiction under section 115, C.P.C. He could not answer satisfactorily and stated that as the respondents are in possession of the properties and they are earning their breads from it therefore, permission be granted to them to withdraw the suit so they may file a fresh suit against the Forest Officer and other necessary parties for the redressal of their grievance. Learned Advocate-General expressed no-objection if the request so made on behalf of the respondents is allowed. Thus in view of the request so made by the respondents' counsel impugned orders operating against the appellants as well as Forest Department are set aside consequently the plaint filed by the respondent is allowed to be withdrawn and permission is also granted to them to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action save in accordance with law before the Court having jurisdiction subject to payment of Rs.1,000 in each case.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 15-1-1996 and 18-1-1996 passed by the High Court of Sindh in R. As. Nos.261, 262, 258, 264, 260, 263, 259 and 257 of 1994).
O.XXIII, R. 1(2)
Withdrawal of suit with permission to file fresh suit
No-objection was raised by the Authorities
Respondents intended to withdraw their suit with permission to file the fresh one and the petitioner/Authorities had no objection to the same
Orders operating against the appellants as well as the Authorities were set aside and the plaint was allowed to be withdrawn with permission to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. H.M. Saya & Co., Karachi v. Wazir Ali Industries Ltd., Karachi and others PLD 1969 SC 65 ref.
Judgment & Decree
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at. length. However, during arguments when we confronted learned counsel for the respondents with the question that how the suit filed by the respondents was competent without impleading the District Forest Officer because record reveals that the property in dispute vests in the Forest Department. It is also pointed out to the learned counsel that in view of judgment of this Court in H.M. Saya & Co., Karachi v. Wazir Ali Industries Ltd., Karachi and others (PLD 1969 SC 65) as to how the appeal filed by Forest Officer before the District Judge was not competent and what illegality or irregularity was committed by the learned District Judge in entertaining/allowing the appeal filed in view of the law laid down by this Court in the judgment referred above and for such circumstances whether there was any occasion for the learned High Court to exercise jurisdiction under section 115, C.P.C. He could not answer satisfactorily and stated that as the respondents are in possession of the properties and they are earning their breads from it therefore, permission be granted to them to withdraw the suit so they may file a fresh suit against the Forest Officer and other necessary parties for the redressal of their grievance. Learned Advocate-General expressed no-objection if the request so made on behalf of the respondents is allowed. Thus in view of the request so made by the respondents' counsel impugned orders operating against the appellants as well as Forest Department are set aside consequently the plaint filed by the respondent is allowed to be withdrawn and permission is also granted to them to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action save in accordance with law before the Court having jurisdiction subject to payment of Rs.1,000 in each case. No order as to costs. M.H./P-59/S Order accordingly.