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

Muhammad Bashir Ahmad vs Province of Punjab through District Officer (Revenue), Faisalabad S — 2024 MLD 1709 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2024 MLD 1709 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
MLD
Parties
Muhammad Bashir Ahmad vs Province of Punjab through District Officer (Revenue), Faisalabad S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 42---C; S. 115; S. 4---S; S. 4; S. 3---S; Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908); Limitation Act (IX of 1908); Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961); Muslim Family Laws Ordinance

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

Muhammad Bashir Ahmad VS Province of Punjab through District Officer (Revenue), Faisalabad S. 42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115 & O.XXIII Rr.1 (2), (3), 2---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), First Sched., Art.120---Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961), S.4---Suit for declaration---Limitation---Mutation of inheritance---Death of daughter before the death of her father---Benefit of S.4 of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961---Concurrent findings of both the courts below---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Withdrawal of earlier suit on the basis of settlement without any specific permission to institute the suit afresh---Filing of a fresh suit---Legality---No permission was sought for filing the suit afresh, therefore, the petitioners were precluded from instituting the fresh suit---Fresh suit was barred by limitation, because the fresh suit was filed after about 08 years of the withdrawal of earlier suit---Daughter (predecessor of petitioners) having died prior to death of her father was rightly excluded from the inheritance mutation as to legacy of her father, because at that time Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 had not been promulgated and enacted; therefore, no benefit of S.4 of the Ordinance ibid was available to the petitioners---Courts below had rightly appreciated and evaluated evidence of the parties and had reached a just conclusion, concurrently, that the petitioners had failed to prove their case by leading cogent, confidence inspiring and trustworthy evidence, thus, concurrent findings on record could not be disturbed in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under S.115, C.P.C.---Judgments and decrees passed by the courts below were upheld---Revision petition was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2024 MLD 1709 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Muhammad Bashir Ahmad VS Province of Punjab through District Officer (Revenue), Faisalabad S.3---Simple withdrawal of earlier suit and filing of fresh suit beyond the period of limitation---Scope---Once limitation begins to run it does not stop in the absence of any solid reason.

Other judgments reported in 2024 MLD

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