| Case ID |
0fafcca9-6ba8-48e8-bbbc-4b67565b68b2 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeal No.126 of 1991 |
| Decision Date |
Feb 24, 1992 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
This appeal is accepted, the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 28-11-1990 is set aside and the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 13-2-1990 is restored. The amount of Rs.1,90,000 (Rupees one lac ninety thousand) deposited in this Court shall not be withdrawn till the claim of the ADBP Chiniot, against the said van is satisfied or a release is given by the said Bank with the permission of the trial Court. When an application is made for the withdrawal of the said amount, the case shall be put up before a learned Single Judge of this Court for necessary scrutiny. A copy of this order should be sent to ADBP, Chiniot. Order accordingly. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case Civil Appeal No.126 of 1991, the Supreme Court of Pakistan deliberated on crucial issues pertaining to the Custody of property during trial under the Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) Section 516-A and the Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Article 185(3). The appellant, Munir Ahmad, challenged the Lahore High Court's decision dated 28-11-1990, which had granted Superdari of a van to Barkhurdar's son, Khizar Hayat, over Ahmad. The van in question, registered as SGE 5430, was initially financed by the Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan (ADBP), Chiniot, under terms that stipulated the vehicle remained in the bank's name until full repayment. However, Barkhurdar violated these terms by selling the van shortly after acquisition, leading to a chain of transactions that culminated in Munir Ahmad acquiring the vehicle. Subsequent legal tussles ensued over the rightful ownership, with allegations of forged documents and improper transfer of title.
The Supreme Court, presided over by Chief Justice Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Justice Rustam S. Sidhwa, focused on the legal entitlements concerning property custody during ongoing litigation. The court granted interim relief by allowing the appellant to retain custody of the van contingent upon depositing a specified amount, ensuring the respondent wouldn't access these funds until the appeal's resolution. This decision underscored the judiciary's commitment to upholding contractual obligations and preventing unauthorized dispositions of assets under dispute.
Key legal principles reinforced include the sanctity of loan agreements, the importance of adhering to stipulated financial conditions, and the judiciary's role in mediating property disputes to ensure equitable outcomes. The case also highlights procedural aspects of appeals in the Pakistani legal system, emphasizing the necessity for clear documentation and lawful transfer of property titles. By restoring the High Court's order and mandating the trial court to oversee the deposited amount, the Supreme Court ensured a balanced approach, safeguarding the interests of both parties while awaiting a definitive resolution on the property's legal ownership.
In essence, this case serves as a precedent for similar disputes involving property custody during trials, reinforcing the application of criminal and constitutional provisions to maintain legal and financial integrity. It also sheds light on the complexities of property transactions intertwined with legal challenges, offering valuable insights for legal practitioners and stakeholders in property law and civil litigation. The involvement of esteemed judges and the meticulous examination of contractual breaches and procedural fairness underscore the depth and rigor of the Pakistani judicial process in resolving intricate legal matters. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Barkhurdar,
Gulzar Ahmad,
Khalid,
Munir Ahmad,
Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan (ADBP), Chiniot,
Khizar Hayat son of Barkhurdar
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J.,
RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J
|
| Lawyers |
Not available
|
| Petitioners |
MUNIR AHMAD
|
| Respondents |
BARKHURDAR and others
|
| Citations |
1992 SLD 700,
1992 SCMR 1454
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
|
| Sections |
S. 516-A,
Art.185(3)
|