' The petitioner instituted a suit against Abdur Razzaq respondent and another for declaration to the effect that he is owner in possession of property in dispute which formed part of property No.103/1 situate- in Block No.1, Bhalwal and entitled to reconstruct the same. The suit was contested by the respondent. The learned trial. Court vide judgment and decree, dated 31-1-1981 dismissed the suit holding that the property in dispute is part of property No.111-A situated in the same locality.
On appeal the aforesaid judgment and decree were maintained. Hence this petition.
2. Abdur Razzaq respondent had earlier filed a petition seeking ejectment of the petitioner from the disputed property. The petitioner denied relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties.
The learned Rent Controller, District Judge and this Court held that the property in dispute was part of property No.111-A and the petitioner a tenant under Abdur Razzaq. The petitioner then filed the aforesaid suit. The learned Civil Judg4 as well as the lower appellate Court took notice of the orders passed between the parties pursuant to the ejectment proceedings and relying on Muhammad Chiragh-ud-Din Bhatti v. The Province of West Pakistan (now Province of Punjab) through Collector, Bahawalpur and 2 others 1971 SCMR 447 held the petitioner's suit barred by principle of res judicata and dismissed the same. Hence this petition.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the judgment of the Supreme Court relied on by the learned lower Courts is distinguishable. The Civil Court being Court of plenary jurisdiction was competent to adjudicate upon the matter irrespective of the findings of the Rent Controller and of this Court in that hierarchy to the contrary.
4. In my view, the learned Civil Judge as well as the lower appellate Court, rightly relied on the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case and held that the principle of res judicata would apply to the instant case particularly that the petitioner is a tenant under Abdur Razzaq in the disputed portion of the property and liable to ejectment.
5. There is no merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.