1990 PLP 1480 (SCMR)
Malik KHALIL AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus Malik HABIB AHMAD and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 1480 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | Malik KHALIL AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus Malik HABIB AHMAD and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 1480 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 1480 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 1480 (SCMR) (Malik KHALIL AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus Malik HABIB AHMAD and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- A.Karim Malik, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S.Abul Aasim Jafari, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- S.Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.l.
- Date of hearing: 10th May, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 26‑4‑1988 in R.S.A. No.65 of 1988). ‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑Suit for partition decreed‑‑Decree upheld by all Courts below‑‑Matter was thoroughly examined by Trial Court by first Appellate Court and finally by High Court‑‑No proposition of law to be examined or a case of misreading of evidence or non‑reading of evidence was made out‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑Suit for partition decreed‑‑Decree upheld by all Courts below‑‑Matter was thoroughly examined by Trial Court by first Appellate Court and finally by High Court‑‑No proposition of law to be examined or a case of misreading of evidence or non‑reading of evidence was made out‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. A.Karim Malik, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S.Abul Aasim Jafari, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. S.Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.l. Date of hearing: 10th May, 1989. GHULAM MUJADDID, J.‑‑‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 26‑4‑1988 whereby his second appeal against the judgment of Additional District Judge, Lahore, dated 6‑11‑1987 was dismissed. The petitioner has been unsuccessful throughout. He deserved it. He is fighting against his own real brothers and sisters. Malik Habib Ahmad, respondent before us, had filed a suit for partition in the Court of Civil ' Judge, Lahore which was decreed. Appeal by the petitioner was dismissed and so was the case with the, second appeal. The case of the petitioner is that he is the exclusive owner of the house and not his father and hence the respondent had no share in the property. This matter was thoroughly examined by the trial Court, by the first appellate Court and finally by the High Court. Therefore, we arc not prepared to re‑appraise the evidence,' especially when there is no proposition of law to be examined nor it is a case either of misreading of evidence or non‑reading of evidence. The petition is dismissed. H.B.T./K‑114/S Petition dismissed.