Injunction Against Co-sharer
• Home Words & Phrases • Legal Terms • Topics • Maxims • Profile • Site Map • Account Status • • Help Search within Results : þÿ Control Your Search…
Home Words & Phrases • Legal Terms • Topics • Maxims • Profile • Site Map • Account Status
Search within Results :
Control Your Search by Selecting Court and Book Name : Your Search for Topic () returned 17 individual Titles. Now Displaying : Page 1-2
Citation Name : 2010 CLC 285 Side Appellant : ABDUL GHAFFAR Side Opponent : WAQAS HAFEEZ
O. XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.8---Suit for possession---Family partition ---No nexus or connection with disputed land---Effect---Plain tiff filed suit for possession through partition along with an application for temporary in junction claimin g therein that the plain tiff bein g co-sharer in the disputed property could not be deprived of use of his share as he was entitled to and had a proprietary in terest in every in ch of the undivided Khata---Defendants contested suit on the ground that as a result of family partition the defendants were in possession of the disputed land out of total land in join t Khata for the last 25 years and that the plain tiff had no nexus or connection with the said partition ---Trial Court dismissed application for restrain in g order again st defendant---Appellate Court on appeal also dismissed the same---Validity---Record revealed that the suit was at prelimin ary stage---Right of the plain tiff in the disputed land and its extent had yet to be determin ed by recordin g of evidence---Defendants were in exclusive possession of the disputed property for the past 25 years on the basis of family partition ---Prima facie case in favour of the plain tiff was not clearly made out--Defendants had in vested huge sums of money in construction of CNG Station and in stallation of equipment and machin ery thereon---Order restrain in g defendants from operatin g the CNG Station would cause in convenience to them more compared to the plain tiff who had no nexus or connection with the disputed land for the past 25 years---Loss, if any, would be calculated in monetary terms---in gredient of irrepairable loss was missin g in the suit---Plain tiff had failed to show any illegality or material irregularity committed by subordin ate courts in exercise of jurisdiction vested in them--Petition was dismissed by High Court.
Citation Name : 2009 CLC 1136 Side Appellant : ABDULLAH Side Opponent : Mst. SAIDAN BIBI
S. 144---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Application for restitution---Scope---Petitioners, in the present case, had in itiated litigation as plain tiffs claimin g a decree for declaration and permanent in junction---Provision of S.144, C.P.C. is based on fundamental prin ciples of law that an act of court should not in jure any person---Restitution is ordered again st the holder of the decree who, in execution thereof, has deprived the opposite party of some benefits and
Citation Name : 1995 PLD 462
Side Appellant : HAJI SHAHJAHAN KHAN Side Opponent : AURANGZEB KHAN
Constitution of Pakistan 1973 0. XXXIX, Rr.l & 2---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)-Temporary in junction---Grant of---Join tly owned land---One of the co-sharer s wanted to construct a house on a portion of such land---Other co-sharer s objected to such construction and filed suit for in junction on the ground that the property was join tly owned by the parties, therefore, the co-sharer be restrain ed from raisin g any construction till such time that regular partition of the land took place--Numerous mutations of sale had been sanctioned of small pieces of land, out of the suit Khasra number for construction purposes and after carvin g out Tatimmas houses had been constructed on such land-Even portion of the land in possession of tie co-sharer (who wanted to construct the house) was earlier sold by one of the co-sharer s who later sold it to him (the co-sharer )---Land in question, thus, had its own identity from rest of the land in suit---High Court, therefore, was justified to set aside that order of in junction in favour of co-sharer s who objected the construction of house by the other co-sharer with direction to the co-sharer who wanted to construct the house to furnish security to the effect that he would remove the construction in case of success of the other co-sharer s regardin g the suit land--Order of High Court bein g in conformity with the law, givin g sufficient safeguard to the in terest of both the parties, Supreme Court declin ed in terference and dismissed the petition for leave to appeal.
Citation Name : 1994 CLC 2409 Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD ASHIQ
Side Opponent : ABDUL JALIL USMAN
co-sharer ----Entitlement of co-sharer to construct on join t property ---Suit for in junction restrain in g defendant from raisin g constructions on the join tly owned land decreed ---Legality---co-sharer could not, ordin arily be permitted to alter the nature of join t property , and to put it to different use from the one for which it was in tended---Neither defendant nor his vendor had been able to establish exclusive possession over the land in question, defendant therefore, could not use it to lay foundation thereon--Even if defendant/co-sharer had been in possession of land in question, still he could not raise construction thereon, without consultin g other co-sharer or partition of land
Citation Name : 1994 MLD 550 Side Appellant : FAZAL DIN Side Opponent : UMAR BIBI
Civil Procedure Code --Order XXXIX of C.P.C. Temporary in junctions and in terlocutory Orders ----OXXXIX, Rr.1 & 2 & S.115---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.54--Temporary in junction---Grant
Copyright Oratier Technologies (Pvt.) Ltd.