| Case ID |
4234f635-c200-4fab-9469-c8a97b6cf0ef |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Suit No. 2604 of 2014 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 22, 2015 |
| Hearing Date |
Dec 16, 2015 |
| Decision |
The court dismissed the application for a temporary injunction filed by the plaintiffs, stating that the mere assertion of infringement of easement rights was insufficient for granting such an injunction. The court emphasized that evidence must be provided to support claims of nuisance and infringement of easement rights. It noted that the balance of convenience did not favor the plaintiffs, as the defendants would suffer irreparable loss if the injunction continued. The court also reiterated that the defendants were constructing in accordance with the approved plan, and any claims regarding easement rights would need to be established during the trial. |
| Summary |
In the case of Civil Suit No. 2604 of 2014, the Sindh High Court addressed the dispute between the plaintiffs, Muhammad Shoaib and another, and the defendants, Messrs M. Kamil Builders and Developers, regarding alleged infringements of easement rights due to construction activities. The plaintiffs sought a temporary injunction to prevent the defendants from continuing construction on a multi-storey building, claiming that the construction would violate their privacy and easement rights. The court ruled that the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate their claims and therefore dismissed their application for an injunction. The decision highlighted the necessity for clear evidence in cases involving easement rights and emphasized that mere assertions are inadequate. The court also pointed out that the defendants' construction was in accordance with the approved plan, and allowing the injunction would lead to irreparable harm for the defendants. This case underscores the importance of establishing factual grounds for claims of nuisance and easement rights in property disputes. The ruling serves as a precedent for similar cases where the balance of convenience is evaluated against the backdrop of evidence requirements and the approval of construction plans. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD IQBAL KALHORO
|
| Lawyers |
Muhammad Mustafa Hussain,
Ms. Sarwat Israr
|
| Petitioners |
ANOTHER,
MUHAMMAD SHOAIB
|
| Respondents |
AND OTHERS,
MESSRS M. KAMIL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,
THROUGH PARTNER
|
| Citations |
2016 SLD 3215,
2016 MLD 1359
|
| Other Citations |
2003 CLC 632,
2009 CLC 1254,
2008 YLR 738,
2010 YLR 2624
|
| Laws Involved |
Easements Act (V of 1882),
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
35,
O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2
|