Pakistan Case Law
1986 SCMR 43

QUTABUDDIN vs SANAULLAH And Other

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1986 SCMR 43
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 345-R of 1985 in Civil Appeal No. 199 of 1983,
Date1985-10-12
Judge(s)Shafiur Rahman, Zaffar Hussain Mirza and Mian Burhanuddin Khan
Authored byShafiur Rahman
ResultAppeal dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter came before the Supreme Court of Pakistan as an appeal regarding a dispute over premises. During the pendency of the proceedings, the appellant filed an application before the Court stating that the appeal had become infructuous because the appellant had successfully obtained possession of the disputed premises. Consequently, the core legal question was whether the appeal could proceed given the change in circumstances rendering the relief sought redundant. The Court accepted the appellant's submission regarding the change in status of the subject matter. Holding that the matter had become infructuous, the Court dismissed the appeal. The key principle laid down is that where the underlying cause of action or the relief sought in an appeal is satisfied or rendered redundant by subsequent events—such as the appellant obtaining the disputed possession—the appeal becomes infructuous and is liable to be dismissed without further adjudication on the merits.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does an appeal become infructuous if the appellant obtains possession of the disputed premises during the pendency of the proceedings?
  • Can an appeal be dismissed if the relief sought has already been achieved by the appellant?
infructuous appealpossession of premisesdismissal of appealcivil litigationmootness

ORDER

1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--Learned counsel for the appellant has filed an application stating therein that this appeal has become infructuous as he has obtained the possession of disputed premises.

2. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous with no order as to costs.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.