1987 PLP 473 (MLD)
Mst. SHAMSHADI BEGUM — Petitioner Versus Mst. HABIB JAHAN ZUBERI — Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 473 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, J |
| Parties | Mst. SHAMSHADI BEGUM — Petitioner Versus Mst. HABIB JAHAN ZUBERI — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 473 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 473 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 473 (MLD) (Mst. SHAMSHADI BEGUM — Petitioner Versus Mst. HABIB JAHAN ZUBERI — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Usman Ghani Rashid for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.115--Revision application against interlocutory order passed in suit--Suit from which revision application had arisen since disposed of and interlocutory order merged in final order--Application dismissed as infructuous. Saeeduddin Ahmad Zuberi, Attorney in person.
Judgment & Decree
Civil Revision Appeal No.243 of 1982, decided on 13th October, 1986.
S.115--Revision application against interlocutory order passed in suit--Suit from which revision application had arisen since disposed of and interlocutory order merged in final order--Application dismissed as infructuous. Usman Ghani Rashid for Petitioner. Saeeduddin Ahmad Zuberi, Attorney in person. The Attorney of the respondent makes a statement in Court that the main suit from which this Revision Application has arisen has been disposed of. It is accordingly contended that as a result of disposal of the suit the Revision application which is admittedly against an interlocutory proceedings is no more maintainable. Mr. Usman Ghani Rashid, does not dispute that the suit has been disposed off but states that as the appeal is still pending the petitioner is entitled to pursue this Revision Application As the main suit has been disposed of the interlocutory order passed by the trial Court stands merged in the final order passed in the suit and any grievance which the petitioner had with respect to the interlocutory order has come to an end with the disposal of the suit. In these circumstances accept the application filed by the respondent and hold that this Revision Application has become infructuous in view of the disposal of the main suit pending before the trial Court. This Revision is accordingly dismissed as infractuous. As a result of the dismissal of the main Revision the miscellaneous application filed by the petitioner is not pressed and dismissed as such. M.Y.H./S-32/K Revision dismissed.