• Home Words & Phrases • Legal Terms • Topics • Maxims • Profile • Site Map • Account Status • • Help Search within Results : þÿ Control Your Search by Selecting Court and Book Name : Your Search for Topic () returned 17 individual Titles. Now Displaying : Page 1-2 þÿ Citation Name : 2010 CLC 285 Side Appellant : ABDUL GHAFFAR Side Opponent : WAQAS HAFEEZ LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE 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 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE 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 SUPREME-COURT 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 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP 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 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE 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.
Please download to view
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
...

Injunction Against Co-sharer

by asim-hafeez

on

Report

Category:

Documents

Download: 2

Comment: 0

102

views

Comments

Description

Download Injunction Against Co-sharer

Transcript

• Home Words & Phrases • Legal Terms • Topics • Maxims • Profile • Site Map • Account Status • • Help Search within Results : þÿ Control Your Search by Selecting Court and Book Name : Your Search for Topic () returned 17 individual Titles. Now Displaying : Page 1-2 þÿ Citation Name : 2010 CLC 285 Side Appellant : ABDUL GHAFFAR Side Opponent : WAQAS HAFEEZ LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE 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 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE 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 SUPREME-COURT 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 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP 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 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE 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.
Fly UP