Faiz Muhammad vs Saeed S — 2026 MLD 892 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

Faiz Muhammad VS Saeed S. 12(2)---Necessary parties, non-impleading of---Fraud and misrepresentation---Scope---Petitioners (Principal of power of attorney )moved an application under S.12(2), C.P.C. before the Trial Court for setting aside the judgment and decree on which order was passed with direction to re-register the case file while filing amended suit, after impleading the petitioners in the suit, however, Appellate / District Court set-aside the said order---Validity---Record revealed that on the basis of the power attorney, the attorneys (respondents ) filed a suit and the matter went up to the Appellate Courts to assail adverse orders and in all the proceedings the petitioners along with co-sharers were named as contesting party---However, prior to final disposal of case by the Trial Court, the suit was withdrawn with permission to file a fresh suit, but in the newly fresh instituted suit, the petitioners were not made a party to the proceedings, while they were under the impression that since they had already executed power of attorney in favour of attorneys and the said attorneys were pursuing the case---But, the attorneys excluded the names of petitioners and after trial, obtained judgment and decree in their favour which the petitioners were claiming to be the product of fraud and misrepresentation---On coming to know about passing of said decree while missing their names, the petitioners immediately approached the Trial Court and apprised the entire situation by filing an application under S.12(2), C.P.C.---Trial Court rightly appreciated the legal position of the case by setting-aside the impugned order, but the Appellate Court without considering the legal aspect of the case had wrongly interfered in it and set aside the order of the Trial Court, which otherwise was well-reasoned---Petitioners, who were already party in the first round of litigation, could not be delisted from the proceedings by the attorneys without any cogent or lawful reason, when otherwise they were the shareholders in the same property, which was devolved upon them from their forefathers---Therefore, any effective decree could not be passed without impleading the petitioners in the proceedings and even if the Trial Court kept in field its earlier decree, then at the time of execution, again third party interest would be accrued---Thus it would be in the best interest of justice and parties that all the shareholder shall be impleaded in the proceedings---It had been established that the petitioners were necessary parties in the suit being filed in respect of ancestral property---High Court set-aside the impugned order passed by First Appellate Court and directed the Trial Court to commence with the proceedings of the case---Revision was accepted accordingly.

Faiz Muhammad vs Saeed S — 2026 MLD 892 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD