1. This Civil Revision- is directed against the judgment dated 3-2-1988 -passed by the 4th Additional District Judge, Karachi South, whereby dismissing the Civil, Misc. Appeal No. 203 of 1.987 filed .By.
2. The applicants and affirming the order dated 12-8-1987'passed by the Xth Civil Judge, Karachi South. The facts leading to the filing of the above revision are that the respondent filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the, applicant. It is the case of the respondent that the present Board of Trustees is m continuous possession of the management, administration and control of the mosque since Jan. 1977 and the management and the administration of the' mosque is being run under their supervision and control and they are making the payment of salaries to Pesh Imam and Moazzan regularly and continuously since Jan. 1977. It is the further case of the respondent that prior to the' formation of the Trust, the present Trustees were being elected annually by the General Body consisting of regular Namazis and members of the Anjuman and they are continuously in possession of the administration of the mosque and running the same and they have constricted the mosque with their own financial resources and with the help of regular Namazis. It is the further case of the respondent that the applicants have nothing to do with the administration and control of the mosque as neither they are regular Namazis nor they are members of the Anjuman or paid any donation towards the construction of the mosque. It is the further case of the respondent that [he defendants/applicants have no locus standi or any legal character to interfere the respondent from running the control, management and administration of the mosque and they are illegally without any lawful authority, with mala fide intention, after taking the law into their own hands, are trying to forcibly remove the Pesh Imam and Moazzam of the mosque and the present Board of Trustees and to take the control and management of the mosque illegally in their hands without any lawful authority.
3. The applicants/defendants resisted the suit. It is the case of the respondent that they examined four witnesses in support to their case when the case was transferred by the learned District Judge vide Order No. A/S.3515/85 dated 4-12-1985.The applicants' counsel was present before the 12th Civil Judge, Karachi South on 10-12-1985 when the matter was adjourned to 8-1-1986 to appear before the transferee Court on 8-1-1986.
4. As the applicants/defendants were not present before the Civil Judge, Karachi, the suit was decreed ex parte on 26-7-1986. The applicants came to know on 28-11-86 about the ex parte judgment (from the rumours spread by the respondent that the Court had decided the matter in his favour and he alongwith his colleagues is going to take possession of the mosque), the applicants/defendants approached their Advocate, who after inquiry from the Court of 12th Sr. Civil Judge (transferor Court) moved an application under Order 9 rules 7 and 13 read with Section 151, C.P.C. The respondent resisted the application. After taking into consideration the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the Civil Judge dismissed the application vide order dated 12-8-1987. The applicants being aggrieved against the order dated 12--8-1987 filed an appeal before the District Judge. Ultimately the case was transferred to the Court of 4th Additional District Judge, Karachi South. After taking into consideration the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the learned Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal as stated in the earlier part of this judgment.
5. I have heard Mr. Rao M. Shakir Naqshbandi, Advocate in support of Civil Revision and Mr. Iqbal Ahmed, Advocate for the respondent. I have perused the diary sheet dated 10-12-1987. A perusal thereof shows that the case was transferred under the orders of District Judge to the Court of XIth Civil Judge. I have also perused the diary sheet dated 5-12-85, 8-1-86, 26-1-86, 18-2-86, 10-3-86, 18-3-86, 30-3-86 and 12-4-86. A perusal thereof shows that the case was received by the Court on 15-12-85 and Court motion notices were ordered to be issued to the learned counsel for the parties for 8-1-86. Diary sheet dated 8-1-86 shows that Court motion notice was received by the learned counsel for the respondent and service was not effected on the applicants or their counsel. It seems that the ex parte judgment dated 26-7-86 was passed without any notice to the applicants and/or their counsel. Any judgment/order passed without any notice to the party is a nullity in the eye of law. (See PLD 1964 S.C. 97). Mr. Iqbal Ahmed does not dispute this legal position. In these circumstances I am of the humble view that the judgment dated 26-7-86, 12-8-87 passed by the trial Court and judgment dated 3-2-88 passed by the IVth Additional District Judge are illegal and without any basis. The same are set aside but subject to payment of Rs. 750 as costs to the learned counsel for the respondent. The parties are directed through their counsel to appear before the 10th Civil Judge, Karachi South on 4-3-89. The learned counsel for the applicants has stated at the Bar that the applicants will produce their evidence on 4-3-89 as the side of the respondent was already closed. The learned trial Court is directed to record the evidence of the applicants and their witnesses and after taking into consideration the arguments advanced by the learned 'counsel for the parties, decide the suit according to law within three months from 4-3-1989. Civil Revision application is disposed of in the above terms.
6. MA.K./Z-97/K revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.