Citation Name: 2024 CLC 340 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD AMIN vs Haji ABDUL WAHID

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: 2024 CLC 340 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD AMIN VS Haji ABDUL WAHID Ss.12(2), 47 & O.XXI, Rr.62, 103---Specific Relief act (1 of 1877), Ss. 42, 12 & 54---Suit for declaration, permanent injunction and specific performance of agreement---Execution proceedings---Question relating to rights of claimant in attached property---Suit barred---Scope---Respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and specific performance of agreement against the Commissioner and others, which was decreed; appeal and civil revision thereagainst were filed but dismissed---Respondents filed execution petition which was allowed---During the execution proceedings the concerned judgment debtors on direction of Court concerned commenced realization of decree consequent whereof an application under S. 12(2), C.P.C., was filed by Mr. "a" for setting aside judgment and decree dated 18.11.2003, which was dismissed being not maintainable---Said applicant assailed the said order by filing civil revision but was dismissed---Said applicant filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction, which was dismissed---Said applicant also filed objection pursuant to judgment/decree dated 13.02.2015, which was rejected, and appeal thereagainst was also dismissed---Pursuant to judgment/decree dated 13.02.2015, during the execution proceedings orders were passed to seize the bank account of Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, which were also assailed---Validity---Record showed that there was no cloud with regard to ownership of the respondents/decree holders in respect of properties described in the plaints, thus the respondents/decree holders were also entitled to receive mesne profit and possession of the land in terms of the decree---Objection of the petitioner on the ground of his claim described in the application/objection had twicely been attended by the Executing Court, appellate Court and High Court---Petitioner in view of Rr. 101, 103 of O.XXI, C.P.C. had claimed protection/restoration of possession---Said Rules in their terms were analogous to S.47 and R.62 of O. XXI, C.P.C.---Combined effect of S.47, Rr. 62 & 103 of O.XXI read with S. 12(2), C.P.C. was that all questions as to title right or interest in a possession of immovable property shall be determined by the Executing Court or by way of filing application/objection and a separate suit was barred---Court while deciding objection of the petitioner upheld the order of the Trial Court, which had not been further assailed by the petitioner and the same had taken finality---Besides suit on the same averments filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by the competent Court, thus the petitioner had failed to point out any material irregularity/illegality to warrant interference in the impugned order---Judgment debtors were liable to realize the decree in accordance with law and could not escape from their liability envisaged under the law---Petitions were dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2024 CLC 340 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD AMIN vs Haji ABDUL WAHID Ss — 2024 CLC 340 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLC