PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Syed JAN ALI SHAH vs GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Secretary/ Senior Member Board of Revenue O — 2023 MLD 77 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2023 MLD 77 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
MLD
Parties
Syed JAN ALI SHAH vs GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Secretary/ Senior Member Board of Revenue O
Subject matter
Civil

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

Judgment text as reported

Syed JAN ALI SHAH VS GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Secretary/ Senior Member Board of Revenue O. I, R. 8---Representative suit---Issuance of notice---Conditions precedent---Where there were numerous persons having the same interest in one suit, one or more of such persons might, with the permission of the Court, sue or be sued or may defend in such suit on behalf of or for the purpose of all persons so interested---Exception to said rule was that in all such cases, the Court should at the expense of the plaintiff give notice of the institution of such a suit to all persons either by personal service or where from the number of persons or any other cause such service is not personally practicable by public advertisement as the Court might direct---In the present case, apparently neither any application was ever filed under O. I, R. 8, C.P.C nor the persons, as mentioned in the Schedule to the plaint were ever served with any notice either personally or through publication---Issuance of notice upon the persons sought to be represented in such suits was mandatory---Suit was incompetent under its representative capacity and could only have proceeded independently on behalf of the applicant---Record showed that the title and the basis on which the ownership was being claimed and declaration had been sought was forged and fabricated---Admittedly, purported sellers of the property were never joined by the applicant---Contention of applicant that their joining was not necessary as sellers had no dispute with the applicant was incorrect---Merely saying that sellers had no issue with the applicant would not suffice---Record showed that sellers being aggrieved by the issuance of notices had also filed their own suit which was dismissed in default---In alternative, applicants had a case against those sellers for committing fraud and cheating by selling the property which was not owned by them with a clear title, but not against present respondents--- Revision was dismissed.

Other judgments reported in 2023 MLD

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English