Find a Lawyer

Civil Review Petition No. 13 of 1969, decided 9th April 1970.

Art. 62‑Review‑Neither any new and important matter or evidence discovered nor any mistake or error apparent on face of record‑No proper case for recon sideration of Court's decision made out‑Court on examination of record reaching same conclusion as before‑Petition for review dismissed.

Sh. Ghias Muhammad, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (F. M. Anwari, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Abdul Karim Sheikh, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 9th April 1970.

‑P. S. L. A. No. K‑30 of 1969 called in question the appointment of a receiver of the lands in dispute by the District Judge on appeal till the decision of the suit instituted by the respondent against the petitioner for declara tion of title and affirmation of possession. The High Court dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner in the view that the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case and that there was danger of the lands being alienated. The petitioner was also found to have cut the standing trees on the land.

As the appointment of receiver was just and proper on the concurrent findings of the Courts below, leave to appeal was refused by the order dated the 9th May 1969. The petitioner now seeks review of the order, but without making out a proper case for re‑consideration of the Court's decision. Neither any new and important matter or evidence has been discovered nor is any mistake or error apparent on the face of the record. On the contrary we have on re‑examining the record reached the same conclusions, namely, that it was just and proper to appoint a receiver of the lands in dispute till the final decision of the suit.

The petition for review is, accordingly, rejected.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.