Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: FAZAL ELAHI VS Respondent: SARFRAZ KHAN
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Aslam Riaz Hussain, Saad Saood Jan Title: FAZAL ELAHI vs SARFRAZ KHAN Case No.: Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 359 of 1982 R.S.A. No 36 of 1969 Date of Judgment:1986-12-13 Reported As: 1987 SCMR 312 Result: Petition dismissed
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment and decree, dated 30-1-1982 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore. 2. The property in dispute in this petition is a house situate in village Noorpur Thal of District Sargodha. It was owned by a Hindu and after Independence it was occupied by the father of the respondent. In 1956 the petitioner filed a suit for possession of the house on the foot of a sale allegedly made in his favour on 25-9-1942 by the Hindu owner. The suit was later withdrawn. On 20- 2-1960 the house was transferred to the father of the respondent and he was issued a P . T . 0 . On 11-3-1961 the petitioner filed a suit against the Hindu owner for a declaration that he was the owner of the house and obtained an ex parte decree on 29-11-1961. When the respondent came to know of this decree he on 10-4-1962 instituted the present suit. In the suit he sought a declaration to the effect that the decree obtained by the petitioner on 29-11-1961 was based on fraud and misrepresentation and had no effect on his rights. The suit was decreed by the trial Court and the petitioner's appeals before the Additional District Judge and the High Court remained unsuccessful. He now seeks leave to appeal in this Court. 3. There is a concurrent finding of the Courts below that the petitioner had obtained the ex parte decree on 29-11-1961 by fraud and misrepresentation. This is a finding of fact based on appreciation of evidence. The High Court was, therefore, justified in not interfering with this finding. In view of this finding no case for grant of leave to appeal. To the petitioner has been made out. The petition is accordingly dismissed.