1995SCMR186 (PLP)
GHULAM HUSSAIN ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ALLAH BAKHSH and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1995SCMR186 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan, Actg. CJ. and Manzoor Hussain Sial, J |
| Parties | GHULAM HUSSAIN ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ALLAH BAKHSH and another‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995SCMR186 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995SCMR186 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan, Actg. CJ. and Manzoor Hussain Sial, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995SCMR186 (PLP) (GHULAM HUSSAIN ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ALLAH BAKHSH and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 15th May, 1994.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment/order of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, dated 7‑2‑1993 in Civil Revision No. 414‑D of 1992). Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 42‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Plaintiff's suit claiming that he and petitioner had jointly purchased specified land and that he had supplied funds for the purchase of a specific share of that land in consequence of which he had become owner thereof, was decreed by all the Courts below‑‑ Validity‑‑‑Question whether plaintiff had made any contribution for purchasing property in question, was one of fact‑‑‑Concurrent findings of Courts below on such question did not suffer from any infirmity‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, Actg. C.J.‑‑‑Allah Bakhsh, respondent No. 1, filed a suit seeking inter alia a declaration to the effect that he was owner in possession of about 6 Kanals and 2 Marlas of land situate in Village Bahadar Garh of Tehsil Dera Ghazi Khan and that his brother Muhammad Bakhsh and, his nephews, Gulzar and Ghulam Hussain had no concern with the said piece of land. His case was that he and the aforesaid persons had jointly purchased 14 Kanals and 3 Marlas of land and that he supplied funds for the purchase of 6 Kanals and 2 Marlas. The suit‑was resisted only by the petitioner who denied that respondent No. 1 had made any contribution towards the purchase of the said land.
2. After considering the evidence of the parties the learned trial Court decreed the suit of respondent‑ No.
1. The petitioner's appeal before the Additional District Judge and revision petition before the High Court failed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
3. The question whether respondent No. 1 had made any contribution when purchasing the property in dispute was one of fact. The concurrent findings of the Courts below on this question do not suffer from any infirmity. Leave to appeal is accordingly refused. AA./G‑463/S Leave refused.