Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Regular Second Appeal No.547 of 1965, decided on 30th April, 1984.
---S.2-A [as added by West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (Amendment) Ordinance (XIII of 1983)]--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VI, r.17--Plaint, amendment of--Suit for declaration that respondent inherited suit land under custom as limited owner could not alienate same without consideration and legal necessity, dismissed by trial Court and same upheld by appellate Court--Appellant making application under O.VI, r.17, C.P.C. in second appeal before High Court seeking amendment of plaint under Muslim Law as fresh cause of action accrued in view of enforcement of Ordinance XIII of 1983--Held, High Court was not called upon to deal with such assertion whether new cause of action had accrued to appellants--Under Ordinance XIII of 1983 all suits and proceedings of such nature pending in any Court stood abated forthwith--Even decree, judgment or order of any Court, contrary to Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) affirming right of reversioners under Custom was declared to be void, inexecutable and of no legal effect--Held, suit stood abated and resultantly appeal has to be dismissed.
Iftikharul Haq Khan for Appellants.
Muhammad Ashraf Khan for Ch. Muhammad Farooq for Respon dents.
Date of hearing: 30th April, 1984.
This second appeal arose out of a suit filed by the appellants on the allegations that Mauj Din (deceased) respondent No.1, inherited the suit land under custom and, as such, being a limited owner he was not authorised to alienate the same without consideration anti legal necessity. It was claimed that the suit land was ancestoral qua them and that the gift made was without necessity and consideration and, as such, was not to affect their, reversionary rights. The suit was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge vide judgment and decree dated 13-1-1964 and this decree of dismissal of suit was upheld in appeal by the learned Additional District Judge vide judgment and decree dated 18-3-1965.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants has moved en application C.M.No.2222-C/84) under Order VI, rule 17, C. P. C. seeking amendment of the plaint so as to claim the property under Muslim Law. It is submitted that fresh and a new cause of action accrues to the appellants in view of the enforcement of Ordinance XIII of 1983. In my view, this Court is not called upon in the present appeal to deal with the assertion whether new cause of action has accrued to the appellants. Under Ordinance XIII of 1983, all-.suit pr other proceedings of such nature pending in any Court stand abated forthwith. Even the decree, judgment or an order of any Court affirming the right of reversioners under custom has been declared to be void, inexecutable and of no legal effect to the extent that the said decree, judgment or order is contrary to the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Act. The suit as such stands abated and the appeal resultantly has to be dismissed. Order accordingly. No order as to costs. This also disposes of the Civil Miscellaneous application.
M . A . K . Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer