FAZAL HUSSAIN AND 3 Others vs Mst. BEGUM BIBI AND Another
Mst. Begum Bibi filed a civil suit against the petitioners seeking the recovery of specific movable items, including ornaments, household goods, and furniture, or alternatively, the recovery of Rs. 14,630 as their monetary value. The petitioners contested the claim in their written statements. Following a trial, the trial court decreed the suit in the sum of Rs. 14,500. Upon appeal, the Additional District Judge, Gujrat, upheld the decree but modified the decretal amount, reducing it by Rs. 2,000. The petitioners subsequently filed a Second Appeal in the High Court, which was dismissed in limine. The petitioners then approached the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The Supreme Court reviewed the proceedings and found no merit in the petition. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, thereby affirming the lower courts' concurrent findings regarding the recovery of the decretal amount.
- Can a second appeal be dismissed in limine if the trial and appellate courts have concurrently found in favor of the plaintiff?
- Is a decree for the recovery of movables or their alternative price legally sustainable if the defendant denies the claim in their written statement?
ORDER
1. G. SAFDAR SHAH, J. Mst. Begum Bibi instituted a suit against the petitioners for the recovery of certain specified items of movables, i.e. Some ornaments, household goods and furniture or in. The alternative for the recovery of Rs. 14,630 as their price. In the written statements fited by them, the petitioners denied the case of Mst. Begum Bibi. After the usual trial of the suit, however, the learned trial Judge decreed the suit of Mst. Begum Bibi in the sum of Rs. 14,500. In- appeal filed by the petitioners before the Additional District Judge, Gujrat, the decree passed by the trial Court was maintained with this modification that the decretal amount was reduced by Rs. 2,000. The petitioners finally went in Second Appeal to the High Court but the same was dismissed in limine vide the impugned judgment dated 17-9-1978.
2. This petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed.