NOOR AHMED through L.Rs, and others vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others
This matter arises from a petition seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court, which dismissed the petitioners' revision petition. The petitioners had filed a suit for specific performance that was initially dismissed by the trial court, remanded in appeal by the District Judge, and subsequently dismissed again upon remand. Instead of filing an appeal against the final dismissal decree, the petitioners directly approached the High Court through a revision petition, primarily challenging the earlier remand order and bypassing the appellate hierarchy. The core legal questions involve the maintainability of a revision petition against a final decree when an appellate remedy was available, and the finality of an un-assailed remand order. The Supreme Court held that the revision petition was incompetent because the remand order had attained finality, the appropriate remedy of appeal against the final decree was not availed, and the revision forum, if any, lay before the District Judge based on pecuniary jurisdiction. The Supreme Court laid down that revisional or supervisory jurisdiction cannot be invoked as a substitute for an omitted appeal in inappropriate cases where statutory remedies are bypassed.
- Can a revision petition be maintained before the High Court against a trial court decree when the statutory remedy of appeal was not availed?
- Whether an order of remand that has attained finality can be challenged through a subsequent revision petition?
- Does a revision petition lie directly before the High Court when pecuniary jurisdiction dictates it should be filed before the District Judge?
ORDER
1. ' MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.---The suit for specific performance filed by the petitioners against the respondents was dismissed by the learned Trial Court. Such decree was challenged by the petitioners before the District Judge in appeal, which was accepted and the case was remanded vide order dated 25.2.2010, after which the suit was again dismissed. The petitioners did not file any appeal against such judgment and decree of dismissal, rather directly filed a revision petition before the learned High Court which (petition) has been discarded through the impugned judgment. In the revision before the learned High Court A primarily the order of remand dated 25.2.2010 was challenged which could not be assailed for the reason that it had attained finality and was not amenable to the revisional jurisdiction. As regards the challenge to the judgment dated 3.4.2010, suffice it to say that the petitioners had failed to avail the appropriate remedy of appeal and even if a revision had to be filed against the order of the learned Civil Judge as per the pecuniary jurisdiction it laid before the District Judge, therefore on this score too, the revision petition filed by the petitioners before learned High Court is absolutely incompetent. Though reliance has been placed on a number of judgments of this Court whereby an appeal has not been filed yet the learned High Court can exercise its jurisdiction against the challenged decree, suffice it to say that there can be no cavil with this proposition, but it has to be in an appropriate case, whereas we do not find this to be an appropriate case for the exercise of revisional/ supervisory jurisdiction by the learned High Court. No case for interference is made out. Dismissed accordingly.
Cited by 6 cases
- Syed Najam Raza Naqvi Versus Mst. Badar Jahan 2026 YLR 1023
- Mst. Nusrat Bibi Versus Defence Housing Authority 2025 YLR 2794
- Tariq Mehmood Sultan vs Mumtaz Ahmed etc 2022 LHC 6455, 2022 [M] CLR 1541
- JAMSHAID AKHTAR Versus ABDUL HAMID KHAN 2023 YLRN 23
- Abdul Waheed and another vs Mst. Rubina Shaheen 2022 CLC 1754
- Abdul Waheed, etc vs Mst. Rubina Shaheen 2022 PLJ Lahore 974