Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMHD YAR AND OTHERS VS Respondent: MST. BAKHAT SAWAI
P L D 1966 W
P L D 1966 W. P. (Rev.) 131(1)
Before I. U. Khan, Member, Board of Revenue, West Pakistan
MUHAMMHD YAR AND OTHERS‑Petitioners
versus
Mst. BAKHAT SAWAI‑Respondent.
Revision No. 1282 of 1962‑63, decided on 8th September 1964.
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. III, r. 4‑Power of attorney‑Genuineness not established‑Counsel mentioned in power of attorney cannot appear in case.
Rana Abdur Rahim for Petitioners. Munawwar Hussain for Respondent.
ORDER
In this case, the learned counsel for the respondent that Muhammad Yar died on 30‑1‑1962 has pointed it out. I, however, find that the power of attorney which is filed with this revision petition bear the thumb‑impression of Muhammad Yar. Sahib Yar who is one of the petitioners and is present says that he did not file this power of attorney, but gave one to his counsel, Rana Abdur Rahim, which was signed by him. This is a case in which prima facie a criminal offence has been committed. Separate action is being taken to hand over Sahib Yar to the Police for necessary action.
It may be added that Allah Bakhsh whose thumb‑impression is also on the power of attorney is present and says that he never filed the power of attorney; that means that the thumb-impression of Allah Bakhsh is not also genuine.
With a view to ensuring that the power of attorney is not subsequently changed, I have signed and dated it.
So far as the case is concerned, Allah Bakhsh the alleged petitioner does not say that he filed the petition. Sahib Yar says that the power of attorney filed with the case is not his. Muhammad Ramzan petitioner is absent in spite of service. Rana Abdur Rahim cannot represent him because the genuineness of the power of attorney is not established. Muhammad Yar has already died and no attempts were made to bring his legal respresentative on record.
The petition cannot, therefore, be said to have been regularly instituted in my Court. It is, therefore, dismissed.
K. M. A. Revision dismissed.