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.
Civil Petition No. 314 of 1977, decided on 5th February‑, 1984.
(From the order dated 2nd March, 1977 of the Lahore High Court passed in Regular Second Appeal No. 136 of 1977).
‑ ‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑Concurrent findings of Courts below on plea of fact‑‑Held, cannot be interfered with by Supreme Court‑‑Leave to appeal refused.
‑‑[Finding of fact].
Syed Riazul Hassan Gilani, Advocate Supreme Court, instructed by Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 5th February, 1984.
.‑‑ The petitioners had sought to pe‑empt a sale of land by a suit on grounds of (1) having superior right as co‑sharers in the khata, and (2) being tenants. None of their pleas succeeded with the result that the suit was dismissed by the trial Court. Before the appellate Court, they did not contest the finding in regard to their claim of being tenants but pressed only their plea of being co‑sharers in the khata. The appellate Court held that they had failed to prove this plea too and accordingly dismissed the appeal. They then moved a second appeal in the Lahore High Court but the same was dismissed in limine.
2. Learned counsel urges that the documents produced on behalf of the petitioners did establish their claim of being co‑sharers in the khata. Unfortunately, he has not filed copy of any of those documents nor of the judgment of the trial Court. He now seeks time to file copy of these documents. But considering that this petition has been pending since 1977, there is no justification for allowing time at this stage. Moreover, we find that the documents produced by the petitioners, particularly the extract from the register Haqdaran had been duly considered by the first appellate Court. The petitioners' plea being one of fact and having been concluded by concurrent finding by the Courts below, there is no scope for interference by this Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
S.Q. Petition dismissed
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer