| Case ID |
2b4f1396-28df-434b-905b-86c8971eef96 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeals Nos. 164 and 165 of 1992 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 14, 1996 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled that the High Court erred in striking off all issues except one and that the proper order after determining the pecuniary jurisdiction should have been to return the appeal to the plaintiffs for proper presentation. The court emphasized the importance of following the procedures outlined in the Suits Valuation Act, which stipulates that jurisdictional objections based on valuation must be raised timely and that the appellate court must determine if such objections have prejudicially affected the case. The judgment highlighted that consent cannot confer jurisdiction and that the proper valuation must always be established for the court to maintain its authority to hear the case. |
| Summary |
In the case of Civil Appeals Nos. 164 and 165 of 1992 before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the court addressed significant issues regarding jurisdiction and the valuation of suits under the Suits Valuation Act (VII of 1887). The appeals arose from a previous decision by the Lahore High Court, which had struck off several issues in a civil suit concerning land ownership and agreements. The main contention was whether the High Court had properly handled jurisdictional objections related to the valuation of the suit. The Supreme Court underscored that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent and that procedural compliance is paramount. The court elaborated on the necessity for timely objections to valuation and how such objections must be substantiated to demonstrate prejudice in the case's merits. The decision reinforced the legal framework surrounding jurisdictional issues in civil appeals, ensuring that procedural integrity is maintained in the judiciary. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Saeduzzaman Siddiqui,
Fazal Ilahi Khan
|
| Lawyers |
Saeed Akhtar, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in C.A. No. 164 of 1992),
Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court (in C.A. Nos. 164 and 165 of 1992),
Ch. Muhammad Anwar Bhinder, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in C.A. No. 165 of 1992)
|
| Petitioners |
Ali Muhammad and others
|
| Respondents |
Muhammad Sham and others
|
| Citations |
1996 SLD 246,
1996 PLD 292
|
| Other Citations |
Kiran Singh and others v. Chaman Paswan and others AIR 1954 SC 340,
Kelu Achan v. Cheriya Parvethi Nethiar AIR 1924 Mad. 6,
Mool Chand v. Ram Kishan AIR 1933 All. 249,
AIR 1949 Pat. 278
|
| Laws Involved |
Suits Valuation Act (VII of 1887),
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
|
| Sections |
S. 11,
Art.185(3)
|