Pakistan Case LawMUHAMMAD YAQOOB Versus Haji MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against a judgment of the Lahore High Court upholding the concurrent orders of the lower courts which rejected the petitioner's suit under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The petitioner sought a declaration that he was the allottee in possession of the disputed shop. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the provisions of Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 were correctly applied by the courts below to reject the plaint. Granting leave to appeal, the Supreme Court held that the contentions raised by the petitioner were arguable and warranted a comprehensive examination by the Court. The key principle laid down is that where the application of rejection of a plaint under Order VII, Rule 11 raises substantial arguable points regarding the proper exercise of judicial discretion, leave to appeal should be granted to scrutinize the legality of the lower courts' concurrent findings.
- Whether Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 has been rightly applied for the rejection of a plaint in a suit for declaration of allotment?
- Do the concurrent findings of lower courts regarding the rejection of a plaint warrant interference by the Supreme Court?
- Are the points regarding the mechanical rejection of a suit under Order VII Rule 11 arguable for the grant of leave to appeal?
ORDER
S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J.---Leave to appeal has been sought by the petitioner against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 17-1-1987, whereby his civil revision against the order of the District Judge, Sargodha, dated 4-6-1986, confirming the order of the Senior Civil Judge, Sargodha, dated 31-3-1986, rejecting his suit under Order 7, Rule 11 of C.P.C. Against the respondent, for declaration that the plaintiff/petitioner was the allottee in possession of the shop in dispute, was dismissed by the impugned judgment.
The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Courts below including the learned High Court did not apply their mind while rejecting the suit of the petitioner under Order 7, Rule 11 of the C.P.C.
After hearing the learned counsel of both the parties, we are of the opinion that the points raised in support of this petition are arguable and needs consideration of this Court. Leave to appeal is therefore, granted to examine whether Order 7 Rule 11 has rightly been applied in this case Security Rs. 5,000.
Appeal is to be made ready on the present record with permission to the parties to add other necessary documents, if any. 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.
Judges on this bench
- Muhammad Afzal Zullah3,959 judgments
- S. Usman Ali Shah326 judgments