Mst. JAMEELA HAMEED vs ATTA MUHAMMAD
This matter arises from a dispute regarding the demarcation and identity of two adjacent properties belonging to the parties. The respondent obtained an ex parte decree against the petitioner, which was upheld on appeal. Meanwhile, the petitioner filed a separate civil suit challenging the ex parte decree on the grounds of fraud, misrepresentation, illegalities, and jurisdictional errors. This suit was dismissed as time-barred, and subsequent appellate and revisional forums upheld the dismissal, leaving the petitioner unable to defend her case on the merits. The core legal question examined by the Supreme Court was whether the petitioner's separate suit challenging the ex parte decree in the second round of litigation was barred by time under the given circumstances. Granting leave to appeal, the Court held that the case warrants a detailed examination of the limitation question to ensure the petitioner is not foreclosed from defending herself on merits, thereby setting the premise for the formal hearing of the appeal.
- Whether a separate civil suit challenging an ex parte decree on grounds of fraud and illegality is barred by time under the circumstances?
- Can a party be denied the opportunity to defend a property dispute on merits due to the dismissal of a suit as time-barred?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--A dispute regarding demarcation and identity of two properties adjacent to each other, belonging to the two parties in this case, was resolved in the first round of litigation initiated by the respondent, in his favour through an ex parte decree against the petitioner.
2. The petitioner/judgment-debtor in that litigation filed appeal which was dismissed, but during the pendency of that appeal she had filed a civil suit challenging the ex parte decree on grounds including fraud, misrepresentation, illegalities and errors of jurisdiction. This suit was dismissed as time-barred. Her appeal and revision have also, accordingly, been dismissed. Thus, the petitioner has failed in the two litigations throughout without so far having been able to avail of the opportunity to defend herself against the claim of the respondent, on merits.
3. After hearing the learned counsel, we consider it a fit case to examine whether in the circumstances of this case the petitioner's suit in the second round, was barred by time.
4. ' Leave to appeal, accordingly, is granted. Security Rs, 2,000.
5. ' The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties to file all necessary documents. 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.