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

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2215 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Muhammad Rehman vs Asim Rasheed O — 2024 YLR 2215 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2024 YLR 2215 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2215 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Muhammad Rehman vs Asim Rasheed O
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 12---S; S. 144

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

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2215 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Muhammad Rehman VS Asim Rasheed O.XXXIX Rr.1, 2, 2-C, O. XXI, Rr. 100, 107, Ss.36, 94(c), 100, 101, 144 & 151---Specific Relief act (I of 1877)---S.12---Suit for specific performance---Temporary injunction qua change of possession---appellate Court granted the same upon an appeal preferred by the petitioner---Restitution/restoration of possession was sought by the respondent before the appellate Court---Legality---Contention of the petitioner was that appellate Court had become functus officio, as no matter was pending before it---Validity---Court of first instance, where suit was pending and sub judice had to be resorted to for redressal of grievance because law had provided a sufficient remedy in the form of filing an application under O.XXXIX, R. 2-C read with S.144 of C.P.C. in case of any violation of the injunctive order passed in favour of a party---application under Ss.36, 94(c), 151 read with O.XXXIX R.2 and O.XXI, R.101 of C.P.C. was not maintainable before the appellate Court because R.101 of O.XXI of C.P.C. could not be read in isolation rather the same would be considered and read with preceding R.100--- Rules 100 and 101 relate to right of third person, who is in possession of the property, for which a decree is passed and not related to the parties to the suit---In the instant matter the suit was still sub judice before the Trial Court and had not finally been decided, therefore, the proper remedy was before the court of first instance i.e. Civil Court, where the suit inter se the parties was pending---appellate Court had wrongly exercised jurisdiction vested with Court of first instance while passing the impugned order, which could not be allowed to hold field further---Revision petition was accepted accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR

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