Abdul Habib v. Fazal Muhammad,
MLD 2012 1856 · Balochistan High Court
Abdul Habib and Fazal Muhammad were disputing over a piece of property. Fazal Muhammad had originally sued Abdul Habib for declaration of ownership, possession, and permanent injunction. However, when the trial court decided the case in 2008, its written judgment only granted declaration of ownership and an injunction stopping Abdul Habib from interfering—it never actually addressed or granted the claim for possession, even though possession had been asked for in the lawsuit. Neither side appealed that judgment, so it became final.
Later, Fazal Muhammad tried to enforce the decree by filing an execution application asking the court to hand him physical possession of the property. Abdul Habib objected, arguing that since the original judgment never granted possession, it could not be enforced at the execution stage. The executing court and the appellate court both rejected his objection and ordered him to hand over possession anyway.
The Balochistan High Court disagreed. It ruled that a decree must always match the judgment it comes from, and a court executing a decree cannot go beyond what the judgment actually granted. Since the judgment never granted possession, silence on that point meant the claim was effectively denied—not silently approved. Because the original judgment was never challenged and had become final, the missing relief could not be added later through execution proceedings. The High Court therefore set aside the lower courts' orders and dismissed the execution application, reinforcing that courts executing decrees cannot rewrite or expand what was originally decided.
عبدالحبیب اور فضل محمد کے درمیان ایک جائیداد پر تنازعہ چل رہا تھا۔ فضل محمد نے ابتدائی طور پر عبدالحبیب کے خلاف ملکیت کی ڈگری، قبضے اور مستقل حکمِ امتناعی کے حصول کے لیے دعویٰ دائر کیا تھا۔ تاہم جب ٹرائل کورٹ نے 2008 میں اس مقدمے کا فیصلہ سنایا تو اس کے تحریری فیصلے میں صرف ملکیت کی ڈگری اور عبدالحبیب کو مداخلت سے روکنے کا حکمِ امتناعی دیا گیا۔ قبضے کے دعوے کو، جو مقدمے میں مانگا گیا تھا، نہ تو زیرِ بحث لایا گیا اور نہ ہی اس پر کوئی فیصلہ دیا گیا۔ کسی بھی فریق نے اس فیصلے کے خلاف اپیل دائر نہیں کی، چنانچہ یہ فیصلہ حتمی ہو گیا۔
بعد میں فضل محمد نے ڈگری پر عملدرآمد کے لیے عملدرآمد کی درخواست دائر کی جس میں عدالت سے استدعا کی گئی کہ اسے جائیداد کا حقیقی قبضہ دلوایا جائے۔ عبدالحبیب نے اعتراض اٹھایا کہ چونکہ اصل فیصلے میں قبضہ دیا ہی نہیں گیا تھا، اس لیے عملدرآمد کے مرحلے پر اسے ن