Pakistan Case Law← Search
2021 SHC 1214

Sir Syed Cooperative H.S Ltd vs Federation Of Pakistan and others

Citation2021 SHC 1214
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.C.P. No.D-4631 of 2015
Date2021-12-07
Judge(s)Zafar Ahmed Rajput, Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
ResultPetition disposed off

ORDER

1. Through instant petition, the petitioner i.e. Sir Syed Cooperative Housing Society Limited, inter alia, seeks following reliefs:- a) Declare that the respondents No.1-3, have no legal authority or right to forcibly hold the Sacrificial Animals Mandi on the petitioner land i.e. Sector 20-A, Scheme No.33, Gulzar -e-Hijri, Karachi. b) Restrain the respondents No.1-3 and even its agents, servants, or anyone else claiming through them or acting on their behalf from holding Sacrificial Animals Mandi or to cause any damage to said Society' s development work, in any manner whatsoever . c) Direct the respondent No.4 to ensure that no one whosoever he may be may not be allowed/permitted to forcibly hold Sacrificial Animals Mandi on Society' s land.

2. It is case of the Petitioner-Society that internal development i.e. boundary wall, un-metalled roads, demarcation of plots, water lines etc. carried on the land of Petitioner-Society situated in Sector 20-A, Scheme No.33, Gulzar-e- Hijri, Karachi, admeasuring 30 acres, has been badly destroyed by holding Sacrificial Animals Mandi by the respondents, to which the Petitioner-Society vide letter dated 10.06.2015 conveyed to the respondent No.2 (The Station Commander Malir , Station Headquarter , Malir Cantonment, Karachi) for not holding Sacrificial Animals Mandi in the year 2015 on the land of the Petitioner-Society; however , despite of such fact and issuance of said letter some officials of the respondent No.2 visited the Society' s land in the second week of July, 2015 for the purpose of holding Sacrificial Animals Mandi deprive members of the Petitioner-S ociety . Hence, this petition has been maintained.

3. The comments have been filed on behalf of Respondents No.2&3, wherein they have denied the allegations against them and have maintained that they always acquire land through lease/ license agreement for a limited period to hold cattle mandi with the consent and settlement of consideration amount; however , they never acquired the land of the Petitioner-Society .

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner conte nds that in fact the respondents No.2&3 had occupied the land of the Petitioner-Society for the purpose of holding Sacrificial Animals Mandi in past without entering into any lease agreement and paying any amount; however , he seeks disposal of the petition by directing respondents No.2&3 to ensure that in future they shall not hold Sacrificial Animals Mandi on the land of the Petitioner-Society without entering into a proper lease agreement. Order accordingly .

5. Petition stands disposed of alongwith pending application.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search