Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1985 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AFSAR ALI vs KOHISTANAY arts

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

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1985 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AFSAR ALI VS KOHISTANAY arts. 117 & 120---Plaint---Onus to prove---Plaintiff must prove his case on the strength of his own evidence; he cannot take benefit from weaknesses of defendant's case. Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1985 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AFSAR ALI VS KOHISTANAY S.3---Limitation---Determination---Court, duty of---It is duty of Court to adhere to question of limitation as S. 3 of Limitation Act, 1908 requires from a Court of law to address question of limitation, even if the same has not been taken as defense by a party. Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1985 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AFSAR ALI VS KOHISTANAY Ss. 42 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Suit for declaration and injunction---Concurrent findings of two Courts below---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Petitioners / plaintiffs claimed to be owners in possession of suit property and had assailed entries made by authorities in favour of respondents / defendants---Suit and appeal filed by petitioners / plaintiffs were dismissed by Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court respectively---Validity---Powers under S.115, C.P.C. have been entrusted to High Court in order to secure effective exercise of its superintendence and visitorial powers of correction, unhindered by technicalities---Such power cannot be invoked against conclusion of law or fact, which does not in any way affect jurisdiction of High Court---Revisional powers are confined to the extent of misreading or non-reading of evidence, jurisdictional error, or an illegality of the nature in the judgment, which may have material effect on the result of the case, or the conclusion drawn therein is perverse, or contrary to the law---Interference for the mere fact that appraisal of evidence could suggest another view of the matter was not possible in revisional jurisdiction---Scope of appellate and revisional jurisdictions must not be mixed up---High court declined to interfere in concurrent findings of facts as judgements and decrees passed by two Courts below were neither result of misreading and non-reading of evidence, nor petitioners could point out any jurisdiction defect in the same---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1985 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AFSAR ALI vs KOHISTANAY arts — 2023 CLC 1985 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC