Pakistan Case Law← Search
1989 MLD 4584

MAQBOOL AHMAD And Others vs Mst. ZANAB BIBI And Another

Citation1989 MLD 4584
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Regular Second Appeal No. 285 of 1980
Date1989-06-26
Judge(s)Abdul Waheed
ResultOrder accordingly

This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the Add]. District Judge, Lahore dated 5th of March, 1980 whereby the appeal from the Judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge; Lahore on 17th of February, 1979 decreeing the suit of Mst. Zenab Bibi, respondent No.1 was dismissed.

2. The main grievance of the appellants is that their appeal was decided in their absence and without hearing their counsel.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has raised an objection that since the suit out of which this appeal arises was instituted on 1st of April, 1974 and its valuation for purposes of court-fee and jurisdiction is Rs. 200, the instant R.S.A. Is not competent. Learned counsel for the appellants concedes this objection and orally requests that this appeal may be converted into a revision petition. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection. Order accordingly.

4. Learned counsel for the parties have after some arguments agreed that since the appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the learned lower appellate Court in their absence and without hearing their counsel, this revision petition may be accepted, and after setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned lower appellate Court, the appeal may be remanded for its fresh decision on merits in accordance with law. Accordingly, this revision petition is accepted and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned lower appellate Court, the appeal is remanded for its decision afresh on merits in accordance with law.

5. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Lahore on 1st of July, 1989. The learned District Judge shall either decide the appeal himself or entrust it to any of the Addl. District Judges who shall dispose of the same within the month of July, 1989. The parties are left to bear their own costs.

6. At this stage learned counsel for the respondents prays that an ad interim injunction may be issued restraining the petitioners from alienating the property in dispute tiff the disposal of the appeal by the learned lower appellate Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners has no objection.

Order accordingly.

H.B.T./M-1616/L

For educational and research use only β€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerΒ·PrivacyΒ·TermsΒ·Search