--Suit for declaration and permanent injunction--Applications for rejection of plaint and condonation of delay--

 PLJ 2021 SC 332

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)--

----Ss. 42 & 54--Civil Procedure Code, (V of 1908), O.VII, R. 11--Limitation Act, (IX of 1908), Ss. 5 & 14--Suit for declaration and permanent injunction--Applications for rejection of plaint and condonation of delay--Application for rejection of plaint was accepted and other was rejected--Suit was rejected--Appeal--Dismissed--Civil revision--Concurrent findings--Time-barred--Challenge to--Instant Suit was filed hence, it was clearly barred by time--Plaint was rightly rejected concurrently by three Courts below and case merits no interference--Civil petition was dismissed.

                                                                                              [P. 333] A

Mr. Muhammad Shahid Maqbool Sehikh, ASC for Petitioners.

Ch. Iqbal Ahmad Khan Dehangal, ASC for Respondents
No. 1 (i-IV) to 9(i-IV)

Date of hearing: 19.3.2020.

 PLJ 2021 SC 332
[Appellate Jurisdiction]
Present: Manzoor Ahmed Malik, Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Amin-ud-Din Khan, JJ.
HAKIM ALI etc.--Petitioners
versus
Mst. FEROZA BEGUM (deceased) thr. L.Rs., etc.--Respondents
C.P. No. 371-L of 2019, decided on 19.3.2020.
(Against the order dated 19.12.2018 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Civil Revision No. 81695 of 2017).

Judgment

Amin-ud-Din Khan, J.--Through this Civil Petition filed under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, leave has been sought against the order dated 19.12.2018, passed by the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Civil Revision Bearing No. 81695 of 2017, filed by the Petitioners, was dismissed.

2. A Suit for Declaration and Permanent Injunction was filed by the Plaintiffs/Petitioners. Two applications were filed in the Suit;

first application was filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC read with Section 11 of the CPC on behalf of Defendant No. 9, and the second application was filed by the Plaintiffs under Sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act, 1908 for condonation of delay. The learned Trial Court was pleased to dismiss the application under Sections 5 and 14 of the afore-said Act of 1908, whereas the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC was accepted and rejected the Suit of the Plaintiffs being barred by time vide judgment and decree dated 28.01.2016. An appeal there-against was also dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 03.06.2017. Thereafter, the Civil Revision filed by the Petitioner before the learned High Court too was dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 19.12.2018. Hence, this Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and perused the available record.

4. The impugned Sale Deed is dated 05.4.1961, of which the Petitioner had knowledge on 17.03.2006 at the very least, when he filed an application under Section 12(2) of the CPC in another Suit based upon the impugned Sale Deed. However, the instant Suit was filed on 20.11.2013, hence, it was clearly barred by time. The plaint was rightly rejected concurrently by the three learned Courts below and the case merits no interference.

5. Consequently, this Civil Petition is dismissed and leave refused.

(Y.A.)  Petition dismissed