BEHRAM HUSSAIN vs ABDUL RASHID SHAH and 4 others
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan by way of a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of the petitioner's two civil revisions by the High Court. The underlying dispute pertains to the transfer of property under settlement laws relating to displaced persons. The core legal question is whether subsequent proceedings before a civil court involving the same subject-matter are barred by the principle of res judicata when the matter has already been adjudicated by the High Court in its writ jurisdiction. The Supreme Court held that the principle of res judicata was rightly applied by the High Court, affirming that civil proceedings are barred under such circumstances. The key principle laid down is that prior adjudication in writ jurisdiction regarding settlement property matters operates as res judicata, precluding a subsequent challenge in civil courts.
- Whether subsequent civil court proceedings are barred by res judicata when the subject-matter has already been decided by the High Court in its writ jurisdiction?
- Does a prior adjudication in settlement property matters under writ jurisdiction preclude a civil suit on the same subject-matter?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J--Leave to appeal has been sought; against the dismissal by the High Court, of petitioner's two Civil Revisions. They had arisen out of his failure in the general jurisdiction of the Civil Court in a matter which had earlier been decided by the High Court in its Writ jurisdiction. The subject-matter of dispute is transfer of property under the Settlement Laws relating to the displaced persons.
2. The learned Judge in the High Court after having examined in detail the pleas in the settlement case concluded on merits, in its writ jurisdiction, came to the conclusion that the proceedings before the Civil Court involving the same subject-matter were barred by res judicata. Reliance was placed on several decisions of the superior Courts including the Supreme Court. We having heard the learned counsel in support of these petitions and having examined the reasoning of the High Court, are satisfied that the principle of res judicata has rightly been applied.
3. ' That being so, leave to appeal is refused.