1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by the defendant in a suit for partition of a shop, against the dismissal of his civil revision by the High Court.
2. ' The dispute now relates only to the division of a Thara in front of the shop which stands partitioned. Learned counsel contended: firstly, that the Thara was not partible; and secondly that more than one-third share of the Thara has been given to the respondent side. Although there was no legal impediment in so far as the partition of the Thara, is concerned; but, after having seen the site plan produced by the learned counsel we feel that the failure to partition the Thara (described in the plaint as platform), would have rendered the partition of the shop to the extent of the respondent's share, unpractical. Without an opening and approach provided by the disputed Thara, the respondent could not have utilised his part of the divided shop.
3. ' The plea that under the rules nothing could be constructed upon the platform is a separate matter altogether. It does not affect the partition. If no construction on the platform, is permissible by any law, it might have its own course. The first contention, therefore, fails.
4. ' The plea regarding lesser share of the platform was not taken before the High Court. It needs inquiry into facts. After some hearing on this point also we do not find any justification to interfere with the impugned judgment. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused.
5. ' Leave to .