2007 PLP 2234 (YLR)
GHULAM MURTAZA — Petitioner Versus SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF
| Citation | 2007 PLP 2234 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Soomro and Faisal Arab, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM MURTAZA — Petitioner Versus SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 2234 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 2234 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Soomro and Faisal Arab, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 2234 (YLR) (GHULAM MURTAZA — Petitioner Versus SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Gul Hassan Solangi for Petitioner.
- Rahmat Ali Rajput for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 11 & O. VII, R.11
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner who claimed to be Hari of land in dispute, had contended that he be considered as lessee of property in question
Suit filed by petitioner was dismissed under O. VII, R.11, C.P.C. and appeal filed by him was also dismissed by Appellate Court for non prosecution
Application filed by petitioner before Chairman Evacuee Trust Property, for joining him as a party was dismissed
Petitioner, did not file appeal against such dismissal of application and when matter was pending before Secretary to the Government, he moved another application to be joined as a party on the ground that he was a lessee
Said application having also been dismissed, petitioner had filed constitutional petition
Petitioner once resorted to remedy by way of civil suit and having failed to seek any relief controversy had become res judicata and he could not re-agitate same dispute before any legal forum. Muhammad Bachal Tonyo, Addl. A.-G.
Judgment & Decree
Present petitioner claims to be Hari of the disputed land and aggrieved by the impugned order he has filed the present petition and is seeking setting aside of the impugned order on the ground that he ought to have been made as a party. The basis of his claim being an old Hari and tenant of Survey Nos.93, 94, 97, 98, 467 to
469. Counsel for the respondents on the other hand has argued that in paragraph-3 of the petition the petitioner himself is claiming cultivation of the land in question under and through Muhammad Ramzan. He has referred to the order passed in Civil Suit filed by Muhammad Ramzan claiming to be the lessee of the property in question. In the said suit order was passed that Muhammad Ramzan Bhutto has no locus standi to seek any interim relief. This order was challenged before District Judge who rejected his appeal. Then Muhammad Ramzan filed an appeal before the High Court which too met the same fate. The proceedings against Muhammad Ramzan attained finality. The present petitioner then filed suit seeking same relief which was sought by Muhammad Ramzan. The suit was dismissed under Order VII, rule 11, C.P.C. and appeal was preferred before District Judge which was dismissed for non-prosecution. The present petitioner did not pursue the matter any further. He then filed an application before the Chairman Evacuee. Trust Property for joining him as a party which was dismissed. He did not prefer any appeal against such dismissal and when the matter was pending before the Secretary to the Government of Pakistan he moved another application to be joined as a party on the ground that he is a lessee. The said application was dismissed and he has come before this Court in the constitutional jurisdiction. The petitioner once resorted to civil remedy by way of civil suit and having failed in seeking any relief the controversy has become res judicata and therefore he cannot re-agitate the same dispute before any legal forum. The petition is dismissed in limine. H.B.T. /G-14/K Petition dismissed.