MLD 1997

1997 PLP 1913 (MLD)

TANVEER AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Civil Revision No.2990‑D of 1996, decided on 26th November, 1996.
Honorable Judges
Raja Muhammad Sabir, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1997 PLP 1913 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Raja Muhammad Sabir, J
Parties TANVEER AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
Primary Law Punjab Undesirable Cooperative Societies (Dissolution) Act (I of 1993)‑‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 PLP 1913 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Undesirable Cooperative Societies (Dissolution) Act (I of 1993)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 PLP 1913 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Raja Muhammad Sabir, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 PLP 1913 (MLD) (TANVEER AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Punjab Undesirable Cooperative Societies (Dissolution) Act (I of 1993)‑‑‑

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑Ss.3, 7, 11, 14 & 17‑‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VIII, R.11‑‑ Civil Courts‑‑‑Bar of jurisdiction‑‑‑Suit for permanent injunction by petitioner restraining respondents from dispossessing him illegally, forcibly and otherwise than in due course of law‑‑‑Rejection of plaint under O.VII, R.11, C.P.C. for bar of jurisdiction of Civil Court under Ss.11 & 17, Punjab Undesirable Cooperative Societies (Dissolution) Act, 1993‑‑‑Order of dismissal of plaint was maintained by Appellate Court‑‑‑ Validity‑‑‑ Petitioner instead of filing application before Liquidation Board in relation to his claim of tenancy, had instituted suit for permanent injunction before Civil Court‑‑‑Petitioner's suit was clearly barred under Ss.7 & 14, Punjab Undesirable Cooperative Societies (Dissolution) Act, 1993‑‑‑Petitioner being tenant under defunct Corporation could only make application before Liquidation Board within specified period‑‑ Petitioner admittedly had not filed any such application with Liquidation Board and property in question, having been taken over by such Board, Civil Court had no jurisdiction to pass any decree of permanent injunction against Liquidation Board‑‑‑Rejection of plaint by Courts below did not suffer from any legal error‑‑‑Impugned order had been correctly passed by Appellate Court keeping in view provisions of Punjab Undesirable Cooperative Societies (Dissolution) Act, 1993, wherein no interference was warranted‑‑‑Orders of dismissal of plaint passed by Courts below were maintained in circumstances. Muhammad Zahid Abbasi, Advocate.

Judgment & Decree

"The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, or in any judgment or decision of any Court or in any agreement, contract or instrument. " The abovesaid provision excludes the applicability of all other laws.

7. Similarly under section 7 of the said Act, all the powers in relation to the properties of defunct societies were entrusted to the Cooperatives Board. The relevant provisions of section 7 of the Act is reproduced below:‑‑‑ "A Cooperatives Board when appointed as a Liquidator under this Act shall have all the powers exercisable by a Liquidator under the Co operative Societies Act, 1925 and in addition to that shall have the power to‑‑‑ (a) verify the claims already filed with the Commission; entertain and dispose of objections against the acceptance or rejection thereof and also entertain claims, in case, reasonable cause is shown for not filing the same earlier; (b) unearth and proceed against any concealed or hidden property of an Undesirable Cooperative Society, whether in the name of any Director, Officer, agent or any of the members of their families or in the name of any other person, body, company or firm acquired or purchased by using or diverting the funds of such a society; (c) determine the assets and liabilities of an Undesirable Cooperative Society and those of its Promoters, Directors, Officers and Agents and of the past members of its committees of management; (d) fix and pay to any person on whose information to a Cooperatives Board any hidden assets of an Undesirable Cooperative Society are retrieved, a compensation not exceeding fifteen per cent. of the value of such assets; (e) cancel all agreements entered into by an Undesirable Cooperative Society or its previous managements or Directors, Officers or Agents which in the opinion of the Cooperatives Board, are mala fide and against the interest of such a society or the members thereof; Subsection (e) of the section 7 of the Act is fully applicable in the instant case.

8. Section 14 of the Act also provides as under:‑‑‑ "Any person having any claim against an Undesirable Cooperative Society or any right over any property or assets of such society or against its Directors, Officers or Agents, whether on the basis of any agreement, sale, transfer or otherwise, may, within thirty days of the appointment of a Liquidator or within a reasonable time allowed by, the Cooperative Judge submit his claim before the Liquidator." The provisions referred to above fully support the concurrent findings of the Courts below.

9. The petitioner instead of filing an application before the Liquidation Board in relation to his claim of tenancy, has instituted a suit for permanent injunction before the learned Civil Judge. The suit of the petitioner was clearly barred under sections 7 and 14 of the Punjab Undesirable Cooperative Societies Dissolution Act, 1993. The petitioner being a tenant under the defunct corporation could only make an application before the Liquidation Board within the specified period. Admittedly, the petitioner has not filed any such application with the Liquidation Board and the property, admittedly having been taken‑over by the Liquidation Board, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction, to pass any decree of permanent injunction against the respondent No.2.

10. The rejection of the plaint by the Courts below does not suffer from any legal error. The impugned order has been correctly passed by the learned Additional District Judge keeping in view the provisions of the Punjab, Undesirable Cooperative Societies Dissolution Act, 1993 and calls for no interference. Hence the revision petition, for the reason stated above, is dismissed in limine alongwith the other connected revision petitions. A.A./T‑12/L Revision dismissed.