Haji JAMIL AHMAD vs MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM
This matter concerns a review petition filed against an interim order passed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The petitioner sought review of a previous order that had granted interim relief—specifically, restoration of possession of demised premises—which the petitioner had not actually requested in their initial petition. The core legal question was whether the Court could grant relief that exceeded the specific prayers made by the petitioner in their application. Upon review, the Court found merit in the contention that the relief granted went beyond what was sought, as the petitioner had only requested an injunction against the respondent to prevent the sale, encumbrance, or transfer of the property pending the final decision of the appeal. The Court held that it should not grant relief not specifically prayed for by the parties. Consequently, the Court recalled its previous direction regarding the restoration of possession and substituted it with an order restraining the respondent from selling, encumbering, or changing the status of the premises until the final disposal of the appeal.
- Can a court grant interim relief that was not specifically prayed for by the petitioner?
- Is a court empowered to recall a direction in a previous order if it exceeds the scope of the relief requested by the parties?
ORDER
1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, .J.--This is a petition for review of that part of the order of this Court dated 25-9-1984 whereby, after granting leave to appeal to the petitioner Muhammad Ibrahim in C.P.S.L.A. No.316-K of 1984 it was directed as follows: "The impugned order of the High Court is suspended with the result that the petitioner shall be put back in possession of the demised premises pursuant to the order passed by the Rent Controller".
2. Mr. Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, learned counsel appearing in support of the review application submits that Muhammad Ibrahim petitioner hod not even prayed for grant of the type of the interim relief which has been granted to him, and in this connection pointed out that what he had prayed for was a direction to be issued against the respondent Haji Jameel Ahmed, not to sell, incumber or in any manner transfer or change the status of the premises in question till the case is decided by this Court.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties in the light of the record before us, we find that there is great force in the plea raised in support of the review application. We, therefore, recall the direction issued by this Court in the judgment dated 25-9-1984 which is contained in the last paragraph of the judgment by which the impugned order of the High Court is suspended and it has been directed that petitioner Muhammad .Ibrahim shall be put back in possession of the demised premises, and instead, grant relief to the aforesaid petitioner in the terms prayed for by him. The last paragraph of the judgment of this Court dated 25-9-1984 shall stand substituted by the following paragraph: "The respondent Haji Jameel Ahmed shall not sell, incumber or in any way transfer or change the status of the premises in question i.e. Shop premises on the ground floor of plot bearing survey No.97, sheet No.MR-I Market Quarters, Kachi Gali No.3, Marriot Road, Karachi till the appeal is decided."
4. The review application accordingly succeeds and is allowed in the terms, stated above, with no order as to costs.