Pakistan Case Law
1990 SCMR 458

MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN vs Mirza MUHAMMAD SAGHIR and another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1990 SCMR 458
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No, 785 of 1981
Date1988-07-20
Judge(s)Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid lqbal
Authored byMuhammad Afzal Zullah
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of a Civil Revision by the High Court in a case involving specific performance. The petitioner had originally succeeded in a trial court where two suits were consolidated. However, the respondents successfully appealed this decision to the District Court. The petitioner's subsequent Civil Revision was dismissed, leading to the current petition. The core legal question presented is whether a single appeal filed by the respondents against a consolidated judgment involving two suits is legally sufficient, or if separate appeals were required. The Supreme Court, noting that leave to appeal had already been granted on this specific issue in a connected matter (Siraj Din v. Rajada), determined that the question requires further examination. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to resolve the procedural validity of the single appeal filed against the consolidated suits and ordered the matter to be heard alongside the connected case, while maintaining the existing stay order.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is a single appeal sufficient against a judgment rendered in consolidated suits?
  • Does the consolidation of suits require separate appeals to be filed by the aggrieved party against each suit?
specific performanceconsolidated suitscivil revisionleave to appealprocedural lawappellate procedure

ORDER

1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by a plaintiff in a case of specific performance, against the dismissal of a Civil Revision by the High Court.

2. ' According to the learned counsel, two suits were filed. They were consolidated. The matter was decided in favour of the petitioner. The respondents' appeal was accepted by the District Court.

3. The petitioner's Civil Revision having been dismissed, he has now sought leave to appeal.

4. Inter alia, it is contended that although two suits were consolidated and the petitioner had succeeded before the trial Court, yet only one appeal was filed from the respondents side before the District Court. Leave to appeal has been granted on this question in C.P. 577 of 1981 (Siraj Din v.

5. Rajada) on 18-7-1988. This point and others raised in the petition require examination. Leave to appeal accordingly is granted in this case also.

6. ' To-be heard alongwith the appeal arising out of the aforementioned case.

7. ' Security Rs,5,000.

8. ' The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties to file all necessary additional documents.

9. ' The stay order to continue. 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.

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