Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition No. 329 of 1982, decided on 19th February, 1984.

(On appeal from the judgment dated 22.2‑1982 of the Lahore Court in Civil Revision No. 1889 of 1980).

‑‑ Art. 185(3) ‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.9‑‑Petitioner including property in question in the list of properties allegedly owned by deceased merely to create territorial jurisdiction in courts at L when said property according to petitioner's own averments in another suit and averment of petitioner's wife (daughter of deceased) in two suits did not belong to deceased‑Petitioner sticking to such false stand right up to Supreme Court‑Supreme Court severely disapproved conduct of petitioner and dismissed petition for leave to appeal with costs.

Walayat Umar Ch., Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Kh. Saeed‑ul‑Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court, Asadullah Siddiqi, Advocate Supreme Court and Maqbool A. Qadri, Advocate-on‑Record for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 19th February, 1984.

‑The petitioner claiming 1/3rd share of the Estate of late Nawabzada Ghulam Naqshband Khan, his father‑in‑law, through a will filed an administration suit in Lahore. Out of the 29 properties listed in the suit only one property, namely property, bearing No. 16‑E‑1, Gulberg‑III was located at Lahore. The respondents moved an application before the trial Court that the Courts at Lahore did not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit because the Property No. 16‑E‑1, Gulberg‑III, Lahore, did not form a part of the Estate of the late Nawabzada Ghulam Naqshband Khan and had only been mentioned in the list of his properties to create territorial jurisdiction of the Courts at Lahore. In this connection, the defendants/respondents filed copies of the plaint of a suit filed by Mst. Nigar Bibi wife of the petitioner, from which it was clear that the property did not form part of the Estate of the late Nawabzada Ghulam Naqshband Khan. A written statement filed by the petitioner and his wife in yet another suit filed by Salahuddin, respondent No. 1 herein, was relied upon in order to support the contention that the said property did not form part of the Estate of the late Nawabzada Ghulam Naqshband Khan.

The learned Civil Judge, after perusing the reply of the petitioner, passed an order on 16‑5‑1979 holding that the Courts at Lahore did not have the territorial jurisdiction and directed that the plaint be returned to the petitioner Plaintiff for presentation to the Court of jurisdiction. The petitioner challenged the order in a petition which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Lahore, on 18‑9‑1980. He then filed a revision petition before the Lahore High Court at Lahore, which, too, failed and was dismissed with costs on 22‑2‑1982. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.

There is absolutely no ground for interference with the order returning the plaint to be presented to the proper Court, because it was satisfaction proved that the petitioner had included the property bearing No. 16‑E‑1, Gulberg‑III, Lahore, in the list of the properties allegedly owned by the late Nawabzada Ghulam Naqshband Khan merely to create territorial jurisdiction in the Courts at Lahore when this property, according to his own averment in another suit and the averment of his wife (the daughter of the late Nawbzada Ghulam Naqshband Khan) in two suits, did not belong to him. The petitioner has stuck to his false stand right up to this Court which cannot but be severely disapproved.

We would dismiss this petition and as an intervener has appeared, direct the petitioner to bear with costs of these proceedings.

M. Z. M. 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.