2003 PLP 1831 (SCMR)
Mst. NAZIRAN BIBI and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2003 PLP 1831 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Rana Bhagwandas and Tanvir Ahmed Khan, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. NAZIRAN BIBI and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Arbitration Act (X of 1940) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1831 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Arbitration Act (X of 1940) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 1831 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Rana Bhagwandas and Tanvir Ahmed Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 1831 (SCMR) (Mst. NAZIRAN BIBI and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Allah Yar Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 4th July, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 9-6-1999 passed in Civil Revision No. 1332 of 1985).
S.21
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXII, R.7
Reference of dispute to arbitration on joint application of parties to the suit-- Contention of defendant was that mother of minor plaintiffs had of authority to make such reference without leave of the Court
Validity-- Minors were living with mother, who was their natural as well as lawful guardian and had no interest adverse to that of minors
Mother would never contract against interests of her real children
Judgment & Decree
RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.
Petitioners seek leave to appeal against Lahore High Court judgment, dated 9-6-1999 in Civil Revision No.1332 of 1985 concurring with the findings of fact recorded by the trial Court as well as the Appellate Court.
2. During pendency of the suit filed by Ghulam Qadir-predecessor in-interest of the petitioners against respondents Nos.1 and 2 and the suit filed by respondents Nos. 1 and 2 against said Ghulam Qadir, on the join: application of the parties, dispute was referred to arbitration. Arbitration Award was duly made. No objections were filed to it. It was made rule of the Court and the suit of respondents Nos.1 and 2 was decreed. Petitioners challenged the judgment and decree on the sole ground that petitioner No.1 i.e. Mst. Naziran Bibi mother of the minor respondents had no authority to refer the dispute to the arbitration without the leave of the Court. This ground was found to be untenable and the appeal dismissed for the reasons that, apart from the fact that minors were living with the mother, she was natural as well as lawful guardian of the minors and had no interest adverse to that of the minors. The findings of fact have been affirmed by the High Court for valid and solid reasons and we do not find any illegality or legal infirmity in such findings. Contention of the learned counsel that leave of the Court was absolutely necessary on the part of the guardian ad litem for the minors, is neither sound nor tenable at law for the Courts below have rightly concluded that mother would never contract against interests of her real children.
3. There being concurrent findings of fact by three Courts below, including the High Court, no ground is made out for interference by this Court. Petition is, thus, dismissed and leave to appeal refused. S.A.K./N-89/S Leave refused.