173/2010 R.A (Civil Revision) Bashir Ahmed (Applicant) V/S Mst.Fatima Begum & Ors (Respondent)

Sindh High Court2016

Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar

Share on WhatsApp
173/2010 R.A (Civil Revision) Bashir Ahmed (Applicant) V/S Mst.Fatima Begum & Ors (Respondent) Sindh High Court Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar Order Date: 29-SEP-16 (a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Suit for declaration---Contention of plaintiff was that he was owner of suit property---Suit was dismissed concurrently---Validity---Plaintiff had been paid sale consideration of suit property---Plaintiff had failed to question the authenticity or any illegality in the process of transfer and execution of lease of suit property in favour of defendant---Plaintiff had not furnished the details of fraud and misrepresentation in his evidence---Defendant was owner of suit property and plaintiff being tenant failed to pay rent of the same---Plaintiff had utilized four different courts for twelve years to prolong his illegal and unlawful possession of suit property against the lawful owner---Suit filed by the plaintiff was frivolous and vexatious---Revision was time barred which was dismissed with cost of Rs. 50,000/---Plaintiff was directed to vacate the premises within thirty days and in case he failed to vacate the same then executing court should issue writ of possession with permission to break up locks without further notice. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115--- Revision--- Limitation---Limitation for revision was ninety days. (c) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S. 21---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199--- Constitutional jurisdiction---Scope---Eviction proceedings---Appeal---Scope---Issues of fact once decided after recording of evidence could be subjected to scrutiny only by the appellate forum provided under the relevant laws---Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 was a special law and only one appeal had been provided against eviction---Remedy of second appeal or revision could not be invoked by the party aggrieved of an order of the appellate forum under the law---Concurrent findings of courts below could not be interfered with in constitutional jurisdiction except jurisdictional defect in the proceedings--- Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court could not be invoked as a substitute of revision or second appeal by a party aggrieved by the final appellate order.
Full judgment text for this case is not yet available on Pakistan Law Reports. Check the official Sindh High Court case law portal for the complete order.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

Red Notices against Foreign National Proclaimed Offender

PLJ 2024 Karachi 138 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2024

Judgment on Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act 2012

PLJ 2023 Karachi 124 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2023

Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2013 explained in a Judgment

PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 154 · Sindh High Court · 2022

Article 140- Cross Examination of a Witness

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020

Re-Examination is more important than Examination in Chief

PLJ 2020 · Sindh High Court · 2020