1989 PLP 1982 (SCMR)
RASHID‑UR‑REHMAN Petitioner Versus AKRAM KHAN and 2 others Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1982 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ |
| Parties | RASHID‑UR‑REHMAN Petitioner Versus AKRAM KHAN and 2 others Respondents |
| Primary Law | Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1982 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1982 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1982 (SCMR) (RASHID‑UR‑REHMAN Petitioner Versus AKRAM KHAN and 2 others Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 27th November, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 19th August, 1984 in Civil Revision No.1328‑D of 1984). ‑‑‑S.42‑‑Constitution of Pak1stan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑Plaintiff having sold 5 Kanals of area to defendant claimed that if a Marla was taken to be equal to 260 square feet, he would be entitled to retain some area over and above 5 Kanals so counted‑‑Defendant's case was that one Marla was equal to 272 square feet in the concerned locality‑‑Plaintiffs suit was decreed by Trial Court but such finding was reversed in appeal as also in revision‑‑Held. if entire sale‑deed was read together, plaintiff had sold the entire plot and there was thus no scope for plaintiff to retain any part thereof on the basis of one calculation ignoring the other‑‑Defendant's case was also supported by the rule laid down by Supreme Court in A. R. Khan's case reported as P L D 1987 S C 107‑‑Leave refused. A.R. Khan v. P.N. Boga through Legal Heir P L D 1987 SC 107 rel.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by a plaintiff in a suit for declaration on the question; whether he was entitled to retain a small part of the plot of land sold to the respondent side. The sale was no doubt of 5 Kanals of area, but the measurement of the site and boundaries of the plot were also specified in the sale‑deed.
2. The petitioner's claim that in case a marla is equal to 260 square feet, he would be able to retain some area over and above 5 Kanals so counted. The respondents' case is that the marla is equal to 272 square feet in the concerned locality. Moreover, according to measurements and boundaries also, the respondents' case would get supported. The petitioner's suit was decreed but the respondents' appeal was allowed, while petitioner's Civil Revision was dismissed by the High Court.
3. After questioning the learned counsel, we are satisfied that if the entire deed is read together, the petitioner had sold the entire plot. There was no scope for him now to retain any part thereof on the basis of one calculation ignoring the other. To be fair to the respondents side, the learned counsel him self referred to A.R. Khan v. P.N. Boga through Legal Heir, PLD 1987 SC 107; which, he frankly stated would support the respondents' case. Accordingly, leave to appeal is refused. A.A./R‑102/S Leave refused.