CHAKLALA CANTONMENT BOARD through Executive Officer, Rawalpindi vs UMAR KHAN & CO

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

CHAKLALA CANTONMENT BOARD through Executive Officer, Rawalpindi VS UMAR KHAN & CO. S. 47---Execution proceedings---Objection petition being vexatious and baseless---Scope and effect---Objection petition moved by Judgment-debtor/ Cantonment-Board was dismissed by the Executing Court, which judgment was maintained by the Appellate Court---Objection raised by the Judgment-debtor/Cantonment-Board (petitioner-Board) was that during proceedings of the execution, decree-holder /respondent succeeded in getting transfer of the land of the Federation in his favour through registered sale deed and possession in consequence thereof had also been delivered to him, which was against the terms of the decree and as such, it was duty of the Executing Court to inquire how the registered sale deed was executed against the spirit of the decree---Validity---Pertinently, initially in the suit, alon gwith Cantonment Board (petitioner-Board), the Federal Government and other entities were also party and decree was directed against all of them---Record revealed that petitioner-Board after exhausting all available remedies (upto the Supreme Court , including moving various petitions continually) and failing to achieve its design, moved objection petition before the Executing Court as a last resort to frustrate the process of the execution in terms of decree passed way back in the year 1990 so as to deprive the decree holder from the fruits of the decree---This is a classic case demonstrating that actual misery of the decree holder starts with the execution---It is not expected from a public office/public officer to carve means for frustrating the process of law---Objection petition , in the present case, was moved without any reasonable cause to thwart the execution process---On dismissal of the objection petition, it was expected that the petitioner-Board should realize its duty and not indulge in unnecessary litigation with the public, which has confidence and trust that being a public body, petitioner-Board shall guard its rights---After dismissal of objection petition, an appeal was filed before the District Court which too was dismissed and rightly so---Objection petition at the face of it is vexatious and baseless---Revision petition filed by the Judgment-debtor/Cantonment-Board, being frivolous and vexatious, was dismissed with special costs of Rs.5,00,000/-, in circumstances.

CHAKLALA CANTONMENT BOARD through Executive Officer, Rawalpindi vs UMAR KHAN & CO — 2025 CLC 386 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC