Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: BASHIR AHMAD VS Respondent: RIZWAN SAEEDHonorable Justice Abdul Shakoor ParachaZafar Iqbal Chohan,Mian Ijaz Hussain
2004 C L C 857
2004 C L C 857
[Lahore]
Before Abdul Shakoor Paracha, J
BASHIR AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner
Versus
RIZWAN SAEED and others‑‑‑Respondents
Civil Revision No.468 of 2003, decided on 6th May, 2003.
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑O. XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2‑‑‑Status quo‑‑‑Both the parties were claiming to be in possession of the suit property; status quo was directed to be maintained at the site and whosoever was in possession of the disputed property, would not be disturbed by the other side‑‑‑High Court directed the Trial Court dispose of the case on merits within specified period.
Mst. Shamail Begum v. Gulzar Begum and 3 others 1994 SCMR 818 and Muhammad Aslam and another v. Muhammad Azeem and 2 others 2000 MLD 893 ref.
Zafar Iqbal Chohan for Petitioner.
Mian Ijaz Hussain for Respondent No.3.
Date of hearing; 6th May, 2003.
ORDER
The learned counsel for the respondents has no objection for admitting the case for regular hearing. However, he states that the case be decided and a direction be issued to the learned trial Court for disposal of the case expeditiously.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Rizwan Saeed‑respondent No. 1 could have not made a valid gift in favour of his real brother Usman Saeed on 15‑2‑2002, on the basis of power‑of -attorney dated 9‑2‑2000 executed by the petitioner. Since gift‑deed in favour of Usman Saeed dated 15‑2‑2000 is illegal and void, the execution of further gift‑deed in favour of Bashir Ahmad son of Noor Ahmad respondent No.3, was also illegal. Reliance has been placed on the cases of Mst. Shamail Begum v. Gulzar Begum and 3 others 1994 SCMR 818 and Muhammad Aslam and another v. Muhammad Azeem and 2 others 2000 MLD 893.
3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents states that Bashir Ahmad son of Noor Muhammad respondent No. 3 is in possession of the land on the basis of the gift made in his favour by Usman Saeed. The learned Civil Judge as well as the learned Additional District Judge rightly dismissed the petition for grant of stay.
4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Since both the parties are claiming to be in possession of the suit property, I direct that status quo shall be maintained at the site. Whosoever, is in possession of the disputed property will not be disturbed by either side. The civil revision is disposed of in the above terms. The learned Civil Judge is directed to dispose of the case on merits preferably within one year.
H.B.T./B‑9/L Order accordingly.