2003 SCMR 779 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus ABDUL QUDDUS and, others — Respondents Civil Petition No. 3615/L of 2001, decided bn 28th March, 2002.
| Citation | 2003 SCMR 779 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Munir A. Sheikh, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus ABDUL QUDDUS and, others — Respondents Civil Petition No. 3615/L of 2001, decided bn 28th March, 2002. |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 SCMR 779 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 SCMR 779 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Munir A. Sheikh, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 SCMR 779 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus ABDUL QUDDUS and, others — Respondents Civil Petition No. 3615/L of 2001, decided bn 28th March, 2002.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mian Sarfraz-ul-Hassan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 28th March, 2002.
- 2. The petitioner filed a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale alongwith which an application was also made for issuance of temporary injunction. The said application was withdrawn by Mr. Imran Saeed Bhatti, Advocate who is son of the learned counsel who was engaged in the case by the petitioner as such the said application was dismissed as withdrawn.
Judgment & Decree
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.
This petition is directed against the judgment dated 6-8-2001 of the Lahore Court through which appeal filed by the petitioner against an interim order passed by the trial Court in the suit filed by him for specific performance of agreement of sale has been dismissed.
2. The petitioner filed a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale alongwith which an application was also made for issuance of temporary injunction. The said application was withdrawn by Mr. Imran Saeed Bhatti, Advocate who is son of the learned counsel who was engaged in the case by the petitioner as such the said application was dismissed as withdrawn.
3. The petitioner made an application that the said order should be recalled for the son of the learned counsel for the petitioner who appeared and made the said statement for withdrawal of the same was not engaged by the petitioner as his counsel. This application was dismissed through order dated 7-7-2001 by the trial Court against which appeal filed by him has also been dismissed by the learned Judge in Chamber of the High Court through the impugned judgment dated 6-8-2001 against which leave is sought.
4. It has been held by the learned Judge of the High Court that the son of the learned counsel of the petitioner who was also admittedly working as his junior must be deemed to have been authorized by thel learned counsel of the petitioner to make statement, therefore, the said statement was not to be treated as unauthorized. In our view, if during the pendency of the suit, the respondents are dealing with the property, the same may ultimately be defended on the ground .of rule of lis-pendens.
5. We are not inclined to interfere in the interim orders passed by the Courts below in our discretion under Article 185 of the Constitution, therefore, this petition is hereby dismissed and leave refused. Q.M.H.7M-446/S Petition dismissed.