MUHAMMAD RASHEED vs Mst. SHAMIM AKHTAR
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a review petition filed by the petitioner against an earlier impugned judgment. The core legal question addressed by the court is whether a new ground regarding the identity of the property, based on differing Khasra numbers, can be raised for the first time at the review stage when it was never urged before the lower courts. The court holds that such a ground is not available to the petitioner because it was neither raised at any earlier stage nor is sustainable, given that the property's description and particulars are sufficiently detailed otherwise to establish its identity beyond merely its Khasra numbers. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismisses the review petition for lack of merit, laying down the principle that new factual grounds not previously raised cannot be introduced in a review petition.
- Can a new ground regarding the identity of property be raised for the first time in a review petition?
- Is a property's identity confined solely to its Khasra numbers when sufficient alternative details of its description are available?
ORDER
1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J: --Mian Abdur Rashid Advocate Supreme Court has already been permitted in this review petition to substitute the learned counsel and also the Advocate-on-Record, who originally were engaged for presenting the case of the petitioner before this Court when the impugned judgment was passed.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner wants to take up a ground which was never earlier raised nor has been dealt with by any of the courts, namely, that the identity of the property as was purchased by the respondent and the one which the petitioner had agreed to purchase was not established because the Khasra Numbers of the two properties were different. This ground would not be available to the petitioner on account of the fact that it was not taken up at any earlier stage, and also for the reason that the particulars and description of the property is not confined to its Khasra numbers but is provided in sufficient detail otherwise to identify the property. This petition has no merit and is, therefore, dismissed.