| Case ID |
2612a7d6-7ddc-437d-9507-357160b366cf |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Revision Application No. 184 of 2008 |
| Decision Date |
Nov 19, 2009 |
| Hearing Date |
Oct 19, 2009 |
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court dismissed the revision application filed by the defendants, affirming the decision of the lower courts which had decreed the plaintiffs' suit for declaration, possession, and perpetual injunction. The court held that the plaintiffs, being owners of a 50% share in the disputed property, were entitled to the relief sought, as their claim did not infringe upon any rights of the National Highway. The court emphasized that the scope of interference in revisional jurisdiction is limited to instances where the lower court acted beyond its jurisdiction or in violation of legal provisions. The plaintiffs had sufficiently described the property in question, and the defendants' claims of ownership were dismissed as they were found to be trespassers. |
| Summary |
In the case of Sindh High Court Civil Revision Application No. 184 of 2008, the court addressed a dispute concerning property ownership and encroachments. The plaintiffs, SULTAN SHAH and others, claimed a 50% ownership share of a property located in Deh and Tapo Sonda, Taluka and District Thatta. They alleged that the defendants had encroached upon their land and constructed structures illegally. The court examined the provisions of the Specific Relief Act, particularly sections 42 and 54, which pertain to the right to seek declaratory relief and perpetual injunctions. The court held that the plaintiffs had the right to seek a declaration of ownership and that the trial court's decree in favor of the plaintiffs was valid, as the defendants did not possess any legal authority over the disputed land. The court reiterated the importance of providing a clear description of the property in legal pleadings, as stipulated by the Civil Procedure Code, and found that the plaintiffs had met this requirement. Ultimately, the court dismissed the defendants' revision application, reinforcing the principle that ownership claims must be substantiated with adequate evidence and that the legal rights of property owners must be protected against unlawful encroachments. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
SHAHID ANWAR BAJWA, JUSTICE
|
| Lawyers |
Hussain Sheikh,
Nazar Hussain Dhoon No.3
|
| Petitioners |
SULTAN SHAH AND 5 OTHERS
|
| Respondents |
PROVINCE OF SINDH THROUGH SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF SINDH, REVENUE DEPARTMENT AND 4 OTHERS
|
| Citations |
2010 SLD 1511,
2010 YLR 528
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Afsar v. Muhammad Zaman and 4 others 2005 YLR 484,
Zohr Ali v. Yusuf and 7 others 1986 CLC 1301,
Government of N.-W.F.P. and another v Gul Muhammad Khan and 5 others 1996 SCMR 1858,
Khalique Ahmed v. Abdul Ghani and another PLD 1973 SC 214,
Mehr and 4 others v. Mst. Sahib Jan alias Shah Begum and 10 others PLD 1973 Lah. 455,
Rashid Ahmed v. Mst. Jiwan and 5 others 1997 Lahore 171,
Ghulam Muhammad and others v. Murad Bakhsh and another PLD 1969 Lah. 95,
Muhammad Suleman v. Wilayatullah Khan and 2 others 1990 CLC 110,
Lal Khan v. Faiz Ahmed and another 1986 SCMR 1962
|
| Laws Involved |
Specific Relief Act, 1877,
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
42,
54,
91,
115,
O.VII, R.3,
O.XX
|