SURIYA ALTAF vs MUHAMMAD WAZIR O — 2024 CLC 1720 ISLAMABAD

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

SURIYA ALTAF VS MUHAMMAD WAZIR O. XXXIX, R. 2(3) & S. 151---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), Ss.42, 12 & 54---Suit for declaration, possession and permanent injunction---Injunction order, violation of---Sealing order passed on report of bailiff---Proceedings in application under O. XXXIX, R.2(3), C.P.C.---Powers of the Court---Scope---Plaintiff, while claiming to be the owner of suit-property pursuant to sale deed/mutation, alleged that the defendants had dispossessed him from the suit-property---Trial Court granted ad-interim injunction directing the defendants to maintain status quo; which injunctive order was later confirmed---Thereafter, the plaintiff filed an application under O.XXXIX, R. 2(3), C.P.C., alleging that in violation of the injunctive order, the defendants were raising construction over the suit -property; the Trial Court, in view of spot inspection report by Court's bailiff, while allowing the said application, directed for the suit property to be sealed ('the sealing order')---Defendants filed revision petition as their assailing the said sealing order but to no avail---Question was whether the Civil Court, while deciding the application under O.XXXIX, R.2(3), C.P.C., was competent to have passed the order for sealing the suit property---Contention of the petitioners / defendants was that sealing of the suit property was without jurisdiction as while deciding the application under O. XXXIX, R. 2(3), C.P.C., the Trial Court had to either punish the alleged contemnors or acquit them---Validity---Petitioners / defendants had not denied that the ad-interim injunctive order was in the favour of respondent / plaintiff---admittedly, the said injunctive relief was confirmed after an inter-partes hearing---Vide the said injunction, the petitioners / defendants were directed to maintain status quo with regard to the suit property---In his application under O.XXXIX, R. 2(3), C.P.C., the respondent / plaintiff had alleged that despite the temporary injunction in the field, the petitioners / defendants, in violation of the said injunction, were raising construction over the suit property---Vide the sealing order, the Civil Court directed the bailiff to visit the spot, enforce the injunctive order with the assistance of the local police and submit a report regarding the suit property---Sealing order passed by the Civil Court referred to the report of the bailiff and observed the same to be affirmative with respect to construction on the suit property---It was in said backdrop that vide sealing order the Civil Court directed for the suit property to be sealed in view of S.151, C.P.C.---Record revealed that after the confirmation of the injunctive order , the contempt petition was filed by the respondent/plaintiff alleging violation of the injunctive order at the hands of the petitioners / defendants by raising construction despite knowledge of the injunctive order---as it was confirmed by the bailiff in his report that the construction was raised on the suit property, the Civil Court did not commit any illegality by sealing the suit property---Indisputably, the act of blatant disregard of an injunctive order was akin to over-reaching the process of law and it was the duty of the Civil Court to protect the rights of the parties as they existed on the date of the filing of the suit and the grant of an injunction---Hence, the impugned orders declining to recall the sealing order passed by the Civil Court did not call for interference---Revision petition filed by the defendants, being merit-less, was dismissed in limine.

SURIYA ALTAF vs MUHAMMAD WAZIR O — 2024 CLC 1720 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLC