| Case ID |
42f0dadd-b15b-4ca7-885d-c183838bafc1 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
IInd Appeal No. 3 of 1995 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 22, 1995 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The appeal was dismissed as the appellants could not demonstrate that the decision of the lower courts was contrary to law or any usage having the force of law. The learned judges concluded that the appellants' claims of tenancy were inconsistent with their previous assertions of ownership based on adverse possession. The doctrine of estoppel was applied, emphasizing that the appellants could not change their stance regarding their relationship with the respondents after previously denying any tenant status. The court noted that the necessary elements for a second appeal under the Civil Procedure Code had not been satisfied, leading to the conclusion that the lower courts had appropriately analyzed the evidence without any illegality warranting interference. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around a property dispute where the appellants, led by Mst. Qamarun Nishan, claimed ownership against the respondents represented by Ch. Muhammad Umer. The core legal principles applied include the doctrine of estoppel and the requirements for filing a second civil appeal under the Civil Procedure Code. The court found that the appellants previously denied being tenants and could not later claim otherwise, which led to the dismissal of their appeal. The ruling reinforced the importance of maintaining consistent legal positions throughout litigation, particularly in property disputes. This case highlights the complexities involved in civil appeals related to tenancy and ownership claims, making it a significant reference point for similar future cases in the Sindh High Court jurisdiction. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
HAMID ALI MIRZA, J
|
| Lawyers |
Hyder Raza Naqvi,
Mumtaz Ahmad Shaikh
|
| Petitioners |
10 others,
Mst. QAMARUN NISHAN
|
| Respondents |
12 others,
Ch. MUHAMMAD UMER
|
| Citations |
1996 SLD 1441 = 1996 CLC 1019
|
| Other Citations |
PLD 1989 Kar. 499,
Mst. Zainab and others v. Fazal Dad and others PLD 1966 (W.P.) Lah. 1050,
Desai and others v. Channappa Mahalingappa and others AIR 1934 Born. 329,
Thana Ram and another v. Himiu Ram and another AIR 1935 Lah. 96,
Mahadeo Singh v. Pudai Singh ILR 5 Lucknow 645,
Saira Bibi v. Chandra Pal Singh AIR 1928 Oudh 503,
Mathra Das v. Kanshi Ram 120 IC 594,
Hamanta Kumari Devi v. Parasanna Kumar Datta ILR 56 Cal.584,
Muhammad Aslam and another v. Imam Bakhsh and 2 others 1980 SCMR 879,
Atta Hussain Khan v. Muhammad Siddique Khan and others PLD 1979 SC 965
|
| Laws Involved |
Qanun-e-Shahadat,
Civil Procedure Code
|
| Sections |
144,
100
|