FAZAL SHAH And Others vs EJAZ AHMAD USMAN And Other
The first respondent filed a suit for pre-emption against the petitioners, which was initially dismissed on the ground that the suit-land was not pre-emptable. After successive appeals and a remand, the suit was ultimately decreed in favor of the plaintiff, with the lower appellate court and the Lahore High Court upholding the decision. In the present petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court, the petitioners contended that the trial Court was bound to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 due to the plaintiff's failure to pay the requisite court-fees. The Supreme Court examined the plea and held that the High Court had correctly applied the principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding court-fees and the rejection of plaints. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming the concurrent findings and the High Court's application of established jurisprudence.
- Whether a plaint must be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 for non-payment of the requisite court-fees?
- Can a second appeal result in the remand of a case to the trial court for decision on merits?
- Order VII Rule 11, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
ORDER
1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The first respondent filed a suit against the petitioners for pre-emption of the suit-land which was dismissed on the ground that the suit-land was not pre-emptable. Appeal against the judgment of the trial Court was dismissed but on a second appeal Lahore High Court remanded the case to the trial Court for decision on merits.
2. In the second round of litigation, suit was decreed by the trial Court in plaintiff's favour, appeal filed by petitioners was dismissed and Lahore High Court also dismissed their revision application. They now seek leave to appeal.
3. The only plea raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that it was incumbent upon the trial Court to reject the plaint of the suit under Order VII, rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure for the plaintiff had not paid the requisite court-fees.
4. This plea was examined in details by the High Court anal was rejected on the principles laid down by this Court in Siddique Khan and others v. .Abdul Shakur Khan and others PLD 1984 SC 289. We find that no exception can be taken with the judgment of the High A Court, for it has correctly applied the rule laid down by this Court on the facts of the present case.
5. The petition is dismissed. 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.