| Case ID |
17a2fedc-5b84-45df-b875-393df2c5520a |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Review Petitions Nos. 28 L of 1993 to 31 L t |
| Decision Date |
Jun 05, 1993 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
Four separate review petitions have been moved against our judgment dated 10 12 1992. The main ground taken up for seeking review of the judgment is that once the Court came to the conclusion as it did in paragraph 19 of the judgment that the law invoked by the petitioners was unexceptionable for claiming relief in the suit, the same should not have been denied to them. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners we find that in applying the accepted principle of law to the facts of the case as discussed in the same paragraph 19, we had found as hereunder: 'On his own showing having never remained in possession during period 1946 to December, 1977, having remained completely ignorant of his ownership during this period, the property having remained in possession of others who claimed it in their own right, could the plaintiff on such pleading claim a case of action since December, 1977 and base a suit on it as within limitation. None of the cases cited shows such an absence of possession over such a long period. Taking the maximum from the plaint (7 years of age in 1946) and out of the law cited by the learned counsel for the respondents Kasam Molla v. Fajel Shek and others (PLD 1952 Dacca 347) the period of limitation for any suit in respect of this property expired in 1963. There is no principle known to law whereunder on expiry of full available period of limitation revival of cause of action afresh and running of the limitation period over again could take place either from the date of knowledge or the attornment of the tenants or on obtaining of possession.' The learned counsel for the petitioners have not been able to demonstrate that the conclusion so reached is open to question on the legal plane. No case for review, is made out. The petitions are, therefore, dismissed. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN through Legal Heirs versus PROVINCE OF THE PUNJAB through Member, Board of Revenue (Residual Properties), Lahore and others, the Supreme Court of Pakistan delivered a significant decision on June 5, 1993, under Civil Review Petitions Nos. 28 L of 1993 to 31 L to 1993 (1995 SLD 672; 1995 SCMR 744). Presided over by Judges SHAFIUR RAHMAN and MUHAMMAD AFZAL LONE, JJ, the case delved into the intricate aspects of property ownership and the limitations imposed by statutory law. The petitioner, represented by esteemed advocates S.M. Zafar and Ch. Inayatullah, argued that the denial of relief was unjustified based on the Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Article 188, Supreme Court Rules 1980 sections OXXVI and R.1, and the Limitation Act (IX of 1908) section S. 3. The core issue revolved around whether the plaintiff, who had not possessed the property from 1946 to 1977, had a valid cause of action within the limitation period. The Court meticulously analyzed precedents, notably citing Kasem Molla v. Fajel Shek and others PLD 1952 Dacca 347, to ascertain that the limitation period for the suit had indeed expired in 1963, thereby rendering the plaintiff's claim invalid. The defense underscored the absence of legal provisions that would allow the revival of a cause of action post the expiry of the limitation period, regardless of the plaintiff's later knowledge or possession acquisition. The petitioners failed to demonstrate any legal grounds to challenge the Court's conclusion, leading to the dismissal of all review petitions. This case underscores the importance of adhering to statutory limitations and reinforces the judiciary's stance on upholding the finality of legal decisions when supported by clear legislative intent. It serves as a pivotal reference for future cases dealing with property rights, statutory limitations, and the procedural intricacies of civil review petitions in Pakistan's legal system. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN,
PROVINCE OF THE PUNJAB,
Legal Heirs,
Member, Board of Revenue (Residual Properties), Lahore
|
| Judges |
SHAFIUR RAHMAN,
MUHAMMAD AFZAL LONE
|
| Lawyers |
S.M. Zafar, Senior Advocate instructed by S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate on-Record,
Ch. Inayatullah, Advocate instructed by Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate on-Record
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN through Legal Heirs ...
|
| Respondents |
PROVINCE OF THE PUNJAB through Member, Board of Revenue (Residual Properties), Lahore and others
|
| Citations |
1995 SLD 672,
1995 SCMR 744
|
| Other Citations |
Kasem Molla v. Fajel Shek and others PLD 1952 Dacca 347
|
| Laws Involved |
Constitution of Pakistan (1973),
Supreme Court Rules 1980,
Limitation Act (IX of 1908),
Review of Supreme Court
|
| Sections |
Art. 188,
OXXVI,
R.1,
S. 3
|