SYED ASGHAR HAIDER, J.--- This petition is directed against the judgment dated 22-4-2006 passed by the Additional District Judge, Okara affirming the judgment and decree dated 13-4-2006 passed by the Civil Judge, Okara whereby the suit for possession filed by the plaintiff/petitioner was dismissed.
2. The petitioner is owner of plot measuring 2 Marlas and 1 Sarsahi, located in Saith Colony, Okara through a registered sale-deed dated 15-3-1975, a mutation to this effect was also sanctioned on 20-8-1989. The respondent No.1 filed a suit for Specific Performance through an oral agreement dated 1980, entered into between him and Ahmad Mustafa deceased through Finance Corporation, Okara, his daughter Mst.
Mubaraka Begum, a through Manager" and consenting written statement was filed, thereafter the suit was decreed, execution (iii) (2005 CLD 688) titled Multan application was filed, in garb of these Edible Oil Extraction Limited v. Proceedings, the respondent No.1 took over National Bank of Pakistan and 2 the possession of the petitioner's plot. The others. Petitioner filed a suit for possession on the 4. The learned counsel for the basis of registered sale-deed in his favour respondents vigorously defended the to retrieve possession. An application under impugned judgment and submitted that the section 12(2), C.P.C. Was also filed lower Appellate Court had impliedly challenging the judgment and decree. The rejected the application which is reflected suit and application were contested by the from the judgment, he however, conceded defendants/respondents, issues were that no independent order to the effect was framed, the parties were put to trial, the passed but this minor error cannot affect trial Court dismissed the application under the outcome of proceedings. section 12(2), C.P.C. And also the suit for possession. Aggrieved, thereof, an appeal 5. I have heard the learned counsel was filed by the petitioner before the for the parties and perused the impugned Additional District Judge, Okara who judgment. Appointed the Naib Tehsildar, Okara, as
6. It is clear from record that Local Commissioner, he inspected the spot objections were filed to the report and they and filed report on 4-1-2006. The petitioner are part of record, it is also clear from filed objections to this report, the lower record that they have not been adjudicated Appellate Court without deciding these or decided, the impugned judgment does objections dismissed the appeal, hence the not reflect or mention the disposal of these present petition. Objection therefore they are still pending
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the lower Appellate Court committed grave illegality and acted against settled principles of law, according to him, all miscellaneous applications are to be decided independently before passing of the final judgment. He relied on the following precedents:- this is violative of law, and the following precedents:-
(i) (2005 CLD 875), titled "Messrs M.A. Chaudhry and 3 others v. National Bank of Pakistan, Faisalabad through General Attorney".
(i) (2005 CLD 875), titled M.A. Chaudhry and 3 National Bank of Faisalabad through Attorney".
(ii) (2005 CLD 1741) titled Ahmad Malik v. Small (2005 CLD 1741) titled "Shabbir "Messrs Ahmad Malik v. Small Business others v. Finance Corporation, Okara, Pakistan, through Manager" and General
(iii) (2005 CLD 688) titled "Multan Edible. Oil Extraction Limited v.
"Shabbir Business National Bank of Pakistan and 2 others."
7. Therefore, the impugned judgment suffers from a patent illegality and cannot sustain.
Resultantly this petition is allowed, the impugned judgment dated 22-4-2006 B passed by the Additional District Judge, Okara, is set aside. The proceedings would deem to be pending before the Additional District Judge, Okara, who shall decide them independently and thereafter, proceed to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law.