1979 PLP 414 (SCMR)
FAZAL HUSSAIN AND 3 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus Mst. BEGUM BIBI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
| Citation | 1979 PLP 414 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | G. Safdar Shah and Karam Elahee Chauhan, JJ |
| Parties | FAZAL HUSSAIN AND 3 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus Mst. BEGUM BIBI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1979 PLP 414 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1979 PLP 414 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: G. Safdar Shah and Karam Elahee Chauhan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1979 PLP 414 (SCMR) (FAZAL HUSSAIN AND 3 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus Mst. BEGUM BIBI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Maulvi Sirajul Haq, Advocate and Muhammad.. Afzal Siddiqi, Advocate -on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 22nd April 1979.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 17‑9‑1978, passed in R. S. A. No, 752 of 1978).
Art. 185 (3)‑Reappraisal of evidence‑Petitioner's counsel unable to point out any misreading of evidence possibly affecting decision of High Court on merits‑Evidence tendered on behalf of parties in trial Court considered at three stages and result gone against petitioner‑Case, held, not fit for embarking upon reappraisal of evidence.
Judgment & Decree
G. SAFDAR SHAH, J. Mst. Begum Bibi instituted a suit against the petitioners for the recovery of certain specified items of movables, i.e. some ornaments, household goods and furniture or in. the alternative for the recovery of Rs. 14,630 as their price. In the written statements fited by them, the petitioners denied the case of Mst. Begum Bibi. After the usual trial of the suit, however, the learned trial Judge decreed the suit of Mst. Begum Bibi in the sum of Rs. 14,
500. In‑ appeal filed by the petitioners before the Additional District Judge, Gujrat, the decree passed by the trial Court was maintained with this modification that the decretal amount was reduced by Rs. 2,
000. The petitioners finally went in Second Appeal to the High Court but the same was dismissed in limine vide the impugned judgment dated 17‑9‑1978. In seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court, Maulvi Sirajul Haq, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the High Court as well as the learned Additional District Judge had misread the evidence on record. By having taken us through the evidence of the parties, the photo copies of which he also placed on the record of the case, the learned counsel was unable to point out to us any misreading of the evidence which could have possibly affected the decision of the High Court on merits. In point of fact the evidence tendered on behalf of the parties in the trial Court has been considered at three stages, but the result has gone against the petitioners. In these circumstances, it is not a case in which this Court would embark upon .the reappraisal of evidence as the learned counsel has been unable to persuade us in that behalf by pointing out any legal principle. This petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.