JOHAR ALI, J. The instant Writ Petition under Section 86 of Gilgit-Baltistan Order, 2018 has been filed against the Judgment/Order dated 10-12-2020 passed by the learned District Judge Ghizer in Civil Revision Petition No.09/2020 whereby the learned District Judge Ghizer has dismissed the Civil Revision No.09/2020 by upholding the Judgment/Order dated 29-09-2020 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge Punial/Ishkoman in Civil Miscellaneous No. 07/2020.
2. Precisely the facts of the case necessary for disposal of instant Writ Petition are that the Petitioners/Plaintiffs have filed a Civil Suit against Respondents/Defendants for declaration and possession of their legal share in Suit land measuring approximately 80 Kanals consisting of 11 pieces of land to the effect that the Petitioners/Plaintiffs and Respondents/Defendants Nos.1 to 3 are legal heirs/successor of late Niaz whose property remained in possession of Respondents/Defendants Nos.1 to 3 who further sold some parts of Suit land to other Respondents/Defendants for which the Petitioners/ Plaintiffs are not responsible and they have right to get possession of their respective shares from Respondents/ Defendants which the Respondents/Defendants are not ready to deliver the same, and prayed for possession of 4/6 share of suit land from Respondents/Defendants.
3. Respondents/Defendants have contested the Suit by filing of their separate Written Statements and denied the averment of the Suit on several legal and factual grounds.
4. The learned trial Court from divergent pleadings of the parties framed 23 issues including Relief and after completion of the proceedings/trial and hearing arguments the learned Senior Civil Judge Punial/lshkoman has Decreed the Suit in favour of present Petitioners/ Decree Holders/Plaintiffs against Respondents/Defendants Nos.1 to 3 to the extent of 4/7 share in legacy of late Niaz last owner of Suit land vide Judgment/Decree dated 21-06-2019.
5. None of the parties have preferred Appeal/Revision etc. against the Judgment/Decree passed by the learned Lower Court/Civil Judge 1st Class Punial/Ishkoman dated 21-06-2019 except Review Petition, which has been filed before the learned trial Court by Petitioners/ Plaintiffs/Decree Holders for adding/incorporating the names of all the Defendants/Respondents/Judgment Debtors in the operative part of the Judgment/Decree dated 21-06-2019.
6. After hearing the arguments on Review Petition under sections 114 and 152, C.P.C. filed by the Petitioner/Plaintiffs/Decree Holders the learned trial Court has dismissed the same vide Judgment/Order dated 29-09-2020 by upholding the Judgment/Order dated 21-06-2019 passed in Civil Suit No.86.
7. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned Judgment/Order passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge Punial/Ishkoman District Ghizer, the present Petitioners/Decree Holders/Plaintiffs filed Civil Revision Petition before the learned District Judge Ghizer. The learned District Judge Ghizer after procuring the attendance of the parties and hearing arguments on Revision Petition has dismissed the Civil Revision Petition filed by the Petitioners/Plaintiffs/Decree Holders by upholding the Judgment/Order passed by the learned trial Court/Senior Civil Judge Punial/Ishkoman dated 29-09-2020 in Civil Miscellaneous No.07/2020.
8. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied from the Judgment/Order passed by the learned District Judge Ghizer the present Petitioners/Plaintiffs have filed the instant Writ Petition before this Court with a prayer that; "It is therefore, humbly prayed that by accepting this Writ Petition, this august Court may be gracious to set aside both the impugned Judgments/Orders of Lower Courts and words dispossession of Respondents Nos. 4 to 19 to the extent of Suit land under their possession may be incorporated in the operative part of Judgment/Decree by accepting Review Petition of present Petitioners. Further direction may also be passed for delivery of possession of the decretal land from the possession of all Respondents in the larger interest of justice".
9. The learned counsel for the Petitioners/Decree Holders submitted that the learned trial Court/Senior Civil Judge Punial/Ishkoman has granted a Decree in favour of Petitioners/Plaintiffs to the extent of 4/7 share from legacy of late Niaz father of the present Petitioners/Plaintiffs to the extent of Respondents/Defendants Nos.1 to 3 while a major portion of decretal land is in actual possession of Respondents/Defendants/Judgment Debtors Nos.4 to 19 and there is no any direction in the operative part of the Judgment/Decree for delivery of possession of the decretal land from the possession of other Respondents/Defendants/Judgment Debtors Nos.4 to 19. The learned counsel for the Petitioners further contended that the Petitioners/Decree Holders/Plaintiffs although in their Suit have prayed for delivery of possession of share of the Petitioners/Plaintiffs/Decree Holders in the inheritance of late Niaz from the possession of all Respondents! Defendants/Judgment Debtors and this very fact has also been incorporated in body of Judgment by discussing in issues wise findings by the learned trial Judge but this crucial and material fact is missing from being incorporating in the operative parts/relief in Judgment/Decree passed in favour of the Petitioners/ Plaintiffs/Decree Holders. Thus the Review Petition filed by the Petitioners/Decree Holders/Plaintiffs before the learned trial Court was a fit case for Review of its Judgment as such there appear floating error on the face of Judgment/Decree of learned trial Court; that the learned trial Courts as well as 1st Appellate Court have badly failed to appreciate the facts and law brought before them during passing impugned Judgment/Order therefore, the impugned Judgments/Orders of learned Lower Courts are incorrect, illegal and against the facts and law available on record of case file, hence both the impugned Judgments/Orders are not maintainable. The learned counsel further submitted that the learned 1st Appellate Court has entirely misunderstood the nature of the case while passing the impugned Judgment/Order in Civil Miscellaneous No.07/2020. The learned counsel for the Petitioners further states that both the Lower Courts have failed to take into consideration these crucial legal and factual defects and floating error in Judgment/Decree as such impugned Judgments/Orders are liable to be set aside. The learned counsel for the Petitioners/Decree Holders lastly prayed that by accepting this Writ Petition, impugned Judgments/Orders of learned Lower Courts may be set aside.
10. Conversely, the learned counsel for the Respondents/Judgment Debtors opposed the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the Petitioners/Decree Holders by asserting that the Respondents/Defendants Nos. 4 to 19 are the bona fide purchasers of the Suit land therefore, the learned trial Court/Senior Civil Judge Punial/Ishkoman has rightly Decreed the Suit to the extent of Defendants/Respondents Nos.1 to 3.
11. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the record with their able assistance.
12. It is admitted fact that the Respondents/Defendants Nos.1 to 3 have sold out the same portion of pieces the Suit land/legacy of late Niaz to other Respondents/Defendants Nos. 4 to 19 before filing of the suit, although they are not entitled to sale out of the common land/inheritance as per law.
The learned trial Court has rightly declared sale of share in legacy of Petitioners/Plaintiffs to other Defendants/Respondents is without lawful authority ab-initio void in the eyes of law by discussing in the Issues Nos.2, 6, 9 and 14 after declaring the sale ab initio void between the Respondents/ Defendants/Judgment Debtors there is no option except to grant decree as prayed for against all Defendants/Respondents/Judgment Debtors but the learned trial Court instead of correction of the operative part of Judgment/Decree in accordance with the finding of the Issue No.2 by the reviving adding/incorporate the word delivery of the possession as well as adding all Defendants/Judgment Debtors in the operative part of the Judgment/Decree dated 21-09-2019 has dismissed the Review Petition filed by the Petitioners/Plaintiffs/Decree Holders under sections 114 and 152, C.P.C., illegally without jurisdiction and against its own finding on Issue No.2 which are legally not maintainable in the eye of law .
13. With the above observation, both the impugned Judgments/Orders passed by both the learned Lower Courts in Review Petition (Civil Miscellaneous No.07/2020) are set aside by accepting this Writ Petition as well as Review Petition and correct/incorporated in the operative part of the Judgment/Decree to add/incorporate the word, all Defendants Nos.1 to 19 and the word delivery of the peaceful possession to Plaintiffs/Petitioners in the operative parts of Judgment/Decree dated 21-06-2019. This Judgment/Order may be treated as an integral part of the Judgment/Decree dated 21-06-2019 passed by the learned trial Court. File be consigned to record after due completion.