1. The parties are locked in litigation since 1965 over a piece of land measuring 2 Kanals 10 Marlas situate in Khasra No,3264/684, which was sold by Rajab Khan, defendant No,2 to Muhammad Turab defendant No,1, for a sum of Rs,2,000. But possession was not delivered to defendant No, 1 . The plaintiff Abdul Ghafoor brought a pre-emption suit against the said transaction, which was contested by the defendants and ultimately, the learned Judge passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff on 3-5-1967 with the condition to deposit the pre-emption money within a week, which he did, Muhammad Turab then filed an appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge, Gilgit which was dismissed. A second appeal of Muhammad Turab defendant was also dismissed by the then Honourable Judge, High Court, Northern Areas, Gilgit on 7-4-1972 and with this the first round of litigation ended between the parties.
2. The second round started with a suit filed by Muhammad Turab for the recovery of the pre- emption amount of Rs,2000, but this suit was dismissed by the then learned Civil Judge, Gilgit vide his judgment dated 22-6-1982. An appeal of Muhammad Turab was also dismissed by the learned District Judge, Gilgit on 19-11-1983.
3. Aggrieved with this judgment and decree, Muhammad Turab filed a second appeal before the then Honourable Judicial Commissioner, Northern Areas, but the same too was dismissed on 22- 10-1984. A review petition before the same forum was also dismissed on 20-2-1985. Muhammad Turab then kept mum for full three years and thereafter started third round of litigation, by filing an application under section 12(2), of the Code of Civil Procedure. This application also met the same fate i,e, dismissal vide order dated 12-11-1989. First appeal of Muhammad Turab before the District Judge was also dismissed on 26-2-1991, whereafter the instant second appeal was filed.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have gone through the chequered record of the case with their assistance. A perusal of the record will make it manifestly clear that the application of the petitioner is clearly time-barred under Article 181 of the Limitation Act, which provides a maximum period of three years for filing of such application. In the instant case, the petitioner has filed the said application after a lapse of 16 years, Therefore, the same is not entertainable under the settled principles of law. If any authority is needed, reference can conveniently be made to two authorities, viz. PLJ 1986 Karachi 217 and 1986 CLC 899, which are clear on the point that such an application, if filed after a lapse of prescribed period of three years is certainly time-barred leaving the Civil Courts right up to this forum having no jurisdiction to entertain the same. The learned lower Courts have, therefore, rightly dismissed the application of the petitioner herein and his first appeal. Even otherwise, a case for interference with the judgments of the Courts below is not made out.
5. Resultantly, this appeal devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed with costs throughout because the petitioner has kept the opposite-party locked in litigation for a couple of years without any legal justification.