ABDUL LATIF and 4 others vs MUHAMMAD KHAN and 15 others
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the defendants against the dismissal of their Regular Second Appeal in a suit for declaration concerning a dispute over property alleged by the plaintiffs to be Waqf property constituting a mosque, and claimed by the petitioners to be in private ownership. The core legal question involves whether concurrent findings of fact rendered by the courts below regarding the nature of the property warrant interference in a second appeal. The Supreme Court held that concurrent findings of fact in favour of the plaintiffs cannot be reopened on merits in the absence of any shown error of law or principle, and technical objections raised by the petitioners do not suffice to grant leave. The ratio decidendi is that concurrent factual findings by lower courts regarding property disputes are binding and unassailable in second appeal unless a substantial error of law or principle is demonstrated.
- Whether concurrent findings of fact rendered by lower courts can be interfered with in a second appeal without demonstrating an error of law or principle?
- Can technical objections substitute for a failure to show an error of law when challenging concurrent findings of fact?
- Is leave to appeal granted against the dismissal of a Regular Second Appeal when the petitioners have no case on merits?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.---Leave to appeal has been sought by the defendants side in a suit for declaration arising out of a dispute relating to Waqf Property; against the dismissal of their Regular Second Appeal.
2. ' As stated by the learned counsel the disputed house, according to respondents/plaintiffs side, is a part of the Waqf Property--a mosque while according to petitioners the house is in private ownership. Learned Courts below have rendered concurrent findings of fact in favour of the plaintiffs/respondents side on the above controversy. That being so, it is no more a fit case for further examination in so far as the facts and merits are concerned; as when asked to show any error of law or principle regarding the findings, the learned counsel instead of doing so raised technical objections. They, in the circumstances of this case are not such so as to grant leave to appeal to the petitioners side who have no case on merits. The same, accordingly, is refused.
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD IQBAL and others Versus ARSHAD IQBAL 2007 SCMR 1179