2018 CLC 459 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Full text

Haji ABDUL WAHID VS ABDULLAH 1990 SCMR 751, 1991 SCMR 525, 1993 CLC 2478, 1995 SCMR 500, O. II, R. 2---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.54---Suit (earlier) for recovery of mesne profit and mandatory injuntion after dismissal of eviction petition---Subsequent suit for ejectment from the premises---Relationship between the parties for ejectment proceedings being of partners in a business---Defendant (partner) was to pay rent of the premises to the plaintiff---Bar to subsequent suit---Different cause of action---Effect---Suit was dismissed being barred under O.II, R.2, C.P.C.---Validity---Defendant had neither denied the half share of plaintiff in the business nor in the rent of the demised premises---Occupation of defendant over the premises was permissive subject to payment of half share of business run by the defendant and payment of rent of the premises---Defendant had denied rent to the plaintiff (owner of the premises) for several years till filing of the present suit---Possession of defendant in circumstances could not be considered as wrongful in the property in question---Trial Court without referring the title of the suit and considering the claim of prior suit had passed the impugned order---Bar provided under O.II, R.2, C.P.C. was only with regard to subsequent suit and not with regard to suit filed simultaneously---Order II, R.2, C.P.C. required the joinder of all claims and relief arising out of same cause of action in a suit---Order II, R.2, C.P.C. did not bar a subsequent suit on different cause of action that had not accrued earlier---Earlier suit was for mandatory injunction with mesne profit and present suit was for ejectment---Present suit was not barred under O.II, R.2, C.P.C.---Impugned judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below could not be sustained in circumstances which were set aside---Case was remanded to the Trial Court to proceed with the matter on merits---Revision was allowed in circumstances.