Dewan JAIRAMDASS AND Others vs Syed NIAMAT ALI AND Other
This matter arises from a petition for review of a judgment of the Supreme Court dated 25-4-1982, which had allowed an appeal and set aside a judgment of the Baluchistan High Court dated 4-10-1981. The original proceedings originated from a civil suit filed in 1972 before the Deputy Commissioner, Karachi, which was referred to the Qazi at Lehari, where the suit was dismissed and a counterclaim was rejected under Order VIII, Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. Subsequent appellate and revisional proceedings before the Majlis-e-Shoora and the High Court culminated in a decree for possession in favor of the petitioners, which was later reversed by the Supreme Court. The core legal question in the review petition was whether sufficient grounds existed to justify a review of the appellate judgment. The Supreme Court held that the arguments advanced merely sought to reagitate questions already considered and disposed of, and no valid ground for review was made out. The petition was accordingly dismissed, affirming that a review cannot be used to reargue settled matters.
- Whether a review petition is maintainable when it merely seeks to reagitate questions already considered and disposed of in the original judgment?
- Can a counterclaim be maintained under Order VIII, Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 in a suit before a Qazi?
- Order VIII Rule 6, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
ORDER
ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, J.-This is a petition for review of judgment of this Court dated 25-4-1982, by which Civil Appeal No. K-97 of 1981 was allowed and the judgment of a learned single Judge- of the Baluchistan High Court, dated 4-10-1981 was set aside.
2. The proceedings that ended with the judgment of the High Court dated 4-10-1981, arose out of a suit filed by the appellants, namely Syed Niamat A.I and others against the present petitioners on 19-3-1972 in the Court of Deputy Commissioner, Karachi. This suit was referred to the court of the Qazi at Lehari. The present petitioners in their written statement had set up a counterclaim, seeking a decree for possession of the disputed lands. The learned Qazi dismissed the suit on the ground of limitation and also rejected the counter claim as not maintainable under Order VIII, rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Although Syed Niamat A.I and - others did not file an appeal against the said judgment, the present petitioners took an appeal before the Majlis-e-Shoora, Kalat Division, who dismissed the appeal as per their judgment dated 10-3-1980. The' petitioners then challenged the said judgment in a revision before the High Court of Baluchistan, which was accepted on 4-10- 1981 and the High Court granted the petitioners a decree for possession of the lands in dispute.
Against this judgment of the High Court this Court allowed the appeal as per judgment dated 25- 4-1982, which is being sought to be reviewed.
3. We have heard Mr. Khalid Ishaq at length in support of the peti--tioner and Mr. Sharaf Faridi on behalf of the appellants (respondents herein). After hearing the learned counsel we find that the arguments advanced merely seek to reagitate questions already considered and disposed of in the judgment of the appeal under consideration. Even otherwise there is no other ground made out justifying the review of the judgment which bas considered the contentions raised in support of the appeal and disposed on the same.
4. In the result there is no substance in this petition which is accordingly dismissed.