ORDER SHEET
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR
Civil Revision Application No. S- 143 of 2019
Civil Revision Application No. S- 71 of 2021
|
Date
of hearing |
Order with signature
of Judge. |
For Hearing of Main Case
Date of Hearing: 13-09-2021
Date of Judgment: 13-09-2021
Mr.
Muhammad Iqbal Memon, Advocate for Applicants in Civil R.A. No. S- 143 of 2019
Syed
Muhammad Ali Shah Rizvi, Advocate for Applicants in Civil R.A. No. S- 71 of
2021
Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Naich, Assistant
A.G-Sindh.
J U D G EM E N T
Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar J., Through
Civil Revision Application No. S-143 of 2019, the
Applicants have impugned Judgment dated 29.04.2019, passed by the District
Judge, Naushehro Feroze in Civil Appeal No.74 of 2019, whereby Judgment of the
trial Court dated 02.02.2019, passed by 1st Senior Civil Judge, Naushehro
Feroze in F.C. Suit No. 91 of 2017, through which the Suit filed by the Respondents
was decreed, has been maintained. The other Civil Revision Application No.71 of
2021 has been filed against order of the same Appellate Court dated 27.3.2021
whereby the Application under Section 12(2) CPC for setting aside the same
judgment of the trial court has been dismissed.
2.
Notice was ordered and the record
reflects that on one hearing i.e. 13.01.2020, respondent No.2 Faiz Muhammad
came in person and sought time to engage Counsel; but thereafter no Counsel was
engaged and repeatedly notices have been sent, but nobody has turned up. Therefore,
no further notice required.
3. Today, I have been assisted by
applicants’ Counsel in main Civil Revision Application and so also in connected
Civil Revision Application. They both have argued that the impugned orders be
set-aside and matter be remanded to the trial court as all the legal heirs were
never arrayed as parties in the main Suit. They have further argued that
insofar as all the legal heirs are concerned, they all are entitled for their
respective share according to Muhammadan Law; however, the concerned Mukhtiarkar
has refused to entertain those who were not joined as Defendants.
3.
It appears that the precise issue
in dispute is amongst legal heirs; and the judgment of the trial Court as well
as Appellate Court reflect that rights of the all legal heirs of Muhammad
Ramzan, Muhammad Ilyas, Mir Muhammad and Muhammad Jam stand duly protected;
therefore, their request for setting aside of the Judgments and remanding of
the matter to the trial Court to join all the legal heirs as Plaintiffs and/or
Defendants would not suffice. This would in fact prejudice all the legal heirs
and matter would be prolonged for unnecessary issue.
4.
In the above circumstances and by consent,
it is ordered as follows:
i). Notwithstanding that all parties were
not joined before the trial court; all Legal Heirs of the aforesaid deceased
persons shall approach the Executing Court individually and/or jointly, as the
case may be, and the Executing Court shall proceed further for transfer/Foti Khata
Badal on the basis of report dated 13.04.2020, placed before learned District
Judge, Naushehro Feroze by the Mukhtiarkar (Revenue) Bhiria vide No. Reader/279
of 2020 Bhiria, dated 13.04.2020, wherein list of legal heirs of three deceased
persons, namely, Muhammad Jam, Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Ilyas has been
finalized. It is needless to mention that legal heirs of Mir Muhammad i.e. Plaintiff
in the Suit shall also be entitled for their respective share.
ii). The Executing Court shall ensure that as
and when the Execution Application is filed, the same is proceeded
expeditiously in the light of the judgment of the trial court as above.
With
these observations, both Civil Revision Applications stand disposed of.
JUDGE
Ahmad