Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1987 SCMR 680

MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE vs MUHAMMAD ABDUL AZIZ RAHMANI

Citation1987 SCMR 680
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.38 of 1987
Date1987-02-07
Judge(s)Mian Burhanuddin Khan, Saad Saood Jan
ResultPetition dismissed

ORDER

MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHANJ.--By this petition leave is sought to appeal against the judgment and order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench dated 28-10-1986 passed in Civil Revision No. 300/ D of 1986/ BWP .

2. Respondent Muhammad Abdul Aziz Rahmani filed a civil suit for the recovery of Rs.24,000 as damages against the petitioner/ Municipal Committee for causing damage to the walls of his house by diverting water. The suit was resisted, the parties led the evidence and the learned trial Judge decreed the suit for Rs.20,000 vide judgment and decree dated 9-3-1986. Appeal filed against this order was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Bahawalpur vide judgment dated 22-9-1986. The petitioner then filed revision petition in the Lahore High Court challenging the finding of the Courts below on issue No.4 which reads as under: "Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs.24,000 as damages from the defendant."

The revision was dismissed by the learned High Court in limine vide the impugned order dated 28- 10-1986.

3. Learned counsel submitted that the impugned judgment suffers from misreading of the report Exh.P.2 prepared by Babu Shakil Ahmad P. W.2 which indicates that the total damage caused to the property of the respondent was to the tune of Rs.1,920; that the respondent had not constructed his house in question according to Plan 'Exh. D/2 sanctioned by the petitioner/ Municipal Committee and has also not paid the development charges, and, therefore, he was not entitled to any damages for illegal construction; that the petitioner had constructed Pucca drain for diverting the flow of water and the plaintiff failed to prove malfeasance on the part of the petitioner.

3. We have considered the arguments and find no reason to interfere with the finding of facts by the Courts below. Babu Shakil Ahmad P. W.2 has candidly admitted in his statement that damages caused to the property of the respondent amounted to Rs.19,420 and he was not confronted with his report Exh. P.

2. We find no merit in this petition. Leave refused. Petition is consequently dismissed.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch