Find a Lawyer

MST. ZAMA BIBI versus SAADAT KHAN

Article 1 561A, ?55 and ?66 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) of the High Court Magistrate, unable to be satisfied with the physical possession of the parties at the relevant time, but dissatisfied with the existence of a breach of the peace. Passed an order under Section 146, CR PC, which the Sessions Court upheld in the review petition, the High Court, however, on this basis terminated the proceedings under Section 555A, CR PC, before that Applicant was unsuccessful. Secondly, in order to prove the correct history of the respondents' possession, the matter may finally be decided in a civil suit already established, and third, that any concerns of breach of the peace due to prolonged litigation There is no ground for the question of the evidence found on the three grounds mentioned above, that the seizure was of such nature that it passed the order of the magistrate, not under section 145, CR PC, but under security. Was pleased with on146, the cause of the PC presented by the High Court can only prevail if the Article, rightly or wrongly, was approved under section 145, because the PC suit of the CR suit was unnecessary. May ultimately decide the privileges of the parties. Immediate dispute possession Possession posed a threat of breach of peace, which did not even involve the question of lengthy litigation because the preliminary injunction did not even last three years after the High Court's approval; Was gone Hike the coherent results of both the courts, which have regular jurisdiction under its hereditary jurisdiction section 616161A, CRPC. jobs for fresh advocates from Dera Ismail Khan lawyer