ALLAH DITTA vs MUHAMMAD ANWAR S — 2022 YLR 336 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ALLAH DITTA VS MUHAMMAD ANWAR S. 12(2)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 31---Fraud and collusion---Maxim "Nullus Commodum Capere Potest De Injuria Sua Propria" (No man shall take advantage of his own wrong)---Certain respondents instituted suit for possession through pre-emption regarding the suit property against one respondent which was dismissed by the Trial Court on the ground of non-fulfilment of necessary Talbs in accordance with law---Appeal was also dismissed by appellate Court---Said respondents filed civil revision before High Court---During pendency of the said civil revision, said respondents settled their disputes by way of compromise and some of the respondents withdrew their revision by filing a written application---On basis of such compromise and withdrawal, High Court decreed their suit for possession through pre-emption---One respondent transferred the suit property through oral mutation of exchange in favour of predecessor of the applicants of instant application---Applicants through the said application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. challenged the validity of the said order of High Court---Validity---Predecessor of applicants got the suit property through mutation of exchange and his rights were directly affected through the judgment/ order of High Court whereby the suit of the respondents was decreed on the basis of compromise, therefore, applicants had every right to file the application under S.12(2) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908---Respondent who transferred the suit property during the proceedings of prior revision petition moved an application before this High Court whereby he acknowledged the sanction of mutation of exchange meaning thereby that at the time of execution of special power of attorney at the time of moving civil petition, and at the time of the decision of the revision petition on the basis of compromise, said respondent was not the owner of the suit property and had not possessed any interest in the suit property, therefore, his admission or statement regarding acceptance of the civil revision had no sanctity in the eye of law---Respondents deliberately/ knowingly concealed material facts regarding appeals, revisions, and revision of revision (ROR) in Board of Revenue from High Court while getting a decision of the civil revision on the basis of compromise---Active concealment of that material facts also tantamount to fraud and misrepresentation---Respondent with mala fide intention concealed material facts before High Court in order to give benefit to the rest of the respondents---Revision petition was got decided on the basis of compromise collusively, therefore, the mutation of exchange sanctioned in favour of predecessor of applicant was not hit by the principle of lis pendens---Respondents were trying to undo the transaction of exchange in order to get back the property through process of the Court, and infact attempting to take advantage of their own fraud---High Court allowed the application and ordered the Civil Revision be restored and be set down for hearing in due course---Costs of present litigation to be borne by the respondents.

ALLAH DITTA vs MUHAMMAD ANWAR S — 2022 YLR 336 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 YLR