Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 319 of 1975, decided on 10th November, 1980

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 27‑1‑1975 in Civil Revision No. 281 of 1974).

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S.172(2)(viii)‑‑Declaratory suit on basis of ownership and that entries in record‑of‑rights about assessment of revenue were incorrect‑‑Suit dismissed by trial Court and First Appellate Court‑‑High Court accepted revision by respondents and restored suit‑‑Supreme Court after having examined the plaint granted leave to appeal to consider whether view of High Court was based on misreading of plaint.

Tanvir Ahmad Khan. Assistant Advocate‑General (Pb.) and Sh. Ijaz Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Dates of hearing: 28th October; 4th, 5th and 10th November, 1980.

The respondents filed a suit against the petitioners for a declaration that they were the owners of the Shamilat Deh (of which particulars are contained in their plaint) and as the further relief claimed by them was that the entries in the Revenue records about the assessment of revenue were not correct, the petitioners took a preliminary objection to the suit on the ground that it was hit by item No. R of subsection (2) of section 172 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967. The question turned on the nature of the relief claimed by the respondents and the learned Civil Judge, Muzaffargarh examined the plaint and reached the conclusion that although the respondents claimed to give declaratory relief they were in fact seeking reduction of land revenue, therefore, that plaint was hit by section 172(2)(8) and that only the Revenue Courts had the jurisdiction to entertain the suit. Accordingly, by his order, dated 13‑1‑1972, he rejected the plaint of the respondents for presentation in the Revenue Courts.

The respondents challenged this order in an appeal in the District Court, but the District Judge, Muzaffargarh dismissed the appeal b) his order, dated 12‑3‑1974, as lie had no doubt that the relief which was really sought by the respondents in their plaint fell within the mischief of item No. 6 of subsection (2) of section 172 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967.

The respondents challenged this order in a revision in the Lahore High Court and as the revision was allowed by a learned Judge on 27‑1‑1975, they have filed this petition for leave.

Mr. Tanvir Ahmad Khan submitted that the view of the learned Judge was based on a misreading of the plaint and having examined the plaint, we are of opinion that his submission requires examination, therefore, we grant leave. The appeal will be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents, if any.

A. A. Leave granted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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