O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P.No.D-2492/2008
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
4. For hearing of Misc. No.5203/09
5. For orders on Nazir Report dated 28.03.09.
6. For hearing of Misc. No.1786/09
7. For hearing of Misc. No.1787/09
3. For hearing of Misc. No.11387/2008
01-10-2009:
Mr. M. Anwar Tariq, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Muhammad Irfan, Advocate for respondent Nos.6 & 7.
Mr. Miran Muhammad Shah, AAG.
- - - - - - -
Petitioners have claimed to be owner of the plot Nos.7 & 8, Naclass No.54, Deh Surjani, District West Karachi. It is inter alia contended that the respondent No.5 who is stated to be MPA, PS 97, is not being represented at the moment.
The petitioners have prayed for the following relief:-
A) It be declared that the petitioners are lawful owners having leasehold rights of the plots in question i.e. plot No.7 & 8, Naclass No.54, Deh. Surjani, District West Karachi, and the order/decision dated 02.12.2008 as passed by respondent No.5 is without lawful authority and does not give right to deprive the petitioners of their possession over the plots in question.
B) Restrain respondents or any other working under them from interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioners over the plots in question i.e. plot Nos.7 & 8, Naclass No.54, Deh Surjani, District West Karachi, as shown in sketch plan issued by respondent No.3 (Annexure P/1 & P/9) and to act in any manner detrimental to the interest of the petitioners.
C) Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. Costs.
It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No.5 has directed the official respondent to declare the subject property as Goth and to complete the codal formalities. It was however, concluded that he "handed over the possession to Project Director's office whereby the Project Director was directed to declare the land as Goth in view of the KDA's verified document and detailed enquiry and also direction to strictly comply as per law, rules and regulations of KDA (CDGK)." It was further contended that the action on the direction of MPA who is not the public functionaries is unwarranted and overstepping his authority on one hand and on other encouraging land grabbers to usurp the property of petitioner and establish a Goth.
Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.6 & 7 contends that the petitioners have already filed proceedings under the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 before the leaned Court below, which proceedings have since been dismissed, against which a revision which has since been admitted by this Court, notices have been issued.
Mr. Miran Muhammad Shah, AAG, states that the official respondent shall proceed strictly in accordance with law. He also concedes that respondent No.5 have himself stated that the action to be taken in accordance with the KDA order and rules under the SLGO 2001, therefore, the official respondent shall act strictly in accordance with law and rules and not under the directives of Respondent No.5 who may be public representative but does not enjoy the status of public functionaries as such. He, therefore, concedes that since Respondent No.5 not being public functionary no writ lies against his purported directive, which has no sanction of law.
In view of the matter, we are of the opinion that since the petitioners have already invoked the jurisdiction of appropriate forum and matter is subjudice in Revision. Petitioner having invoked alternate and efficacious remedy cannot invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. There seems to be no interference caused by the public functionaries. There seems to be private dispute between the petitioners and private respondents and unauthorized occupation which is already subjudice in appropriate proceeding.
With these observations, the petition is disposed of alongwith all pending applications. Needless to say that any observation in this matter will not influence the case of either party before the proceeding pending adjudication before the revisional Court.
J U D G E
J U D G E
Nadeem
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
H.C.A. No.D-30/2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
For Katcha Peshi.
01-10-2009:
Mr. Rana Muhammad Ahmed Khan, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, Advocate for CDGK.
Mr. Miran Muhammad Shah, AAG.
- - - - -- - - - - -
The only controversy involved in this matter needs to be resolved before the learned single Judge is whether the land claimed by the plaintiff was left out or excess land then what was acquired by the respondent. In order to resolve this confusion learned counsel for CDGK requests for time to assist the Court as to what was the material on record to arrive at that there was no land in excess that could have been claimed by the appellant from the predecessor in-interest through sub-lessee.
To come up on 16.10.2009.
J U D G E
J U D G E
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
H.C.A. No.118/2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGES
1. For orders on CMA No.647/09.
2. For Katcha Peshi.
3. For orders on CMA No.648/09.
01.10.2009:
None is present for the Appellant.
Mr. Abbas Ali, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2..
- - - - -- - - - - -
It appears that the appellant has impugned the order dated 07.04.2009 passed on CMA No.1662/09, which was dismissed and ad-interim order passed thereon was evicted and it seems that the suit was permitted on the basis of interference in the contract whereby supply of the water as stated by the learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Since the contract has come to an end and the counsel for the appellant has not contested the proceedings as well as the hydrant is also been taken over by CDGK and is no more available with the previous management it seems that for these reasons the appellant is not present to contest the instant appeal, which is dismissed for non-prosecution alongwith all pending applications.
J U D G E
J U D G E
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P. No.D-377/2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
1. For hearing of Misc. No.8261/2009
2. For Katcha Peshi.
3. For hearing of Misc.1650/2009
01-10-2009:
Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, Advocate for CDGK.
Mr. Miran Muhammad Shah, AAG.
- - - - -- - - - - -
Mr. Salahuddin, Advocate, wants to file vakalatnama and counter affidavit on behalf of Respondent No.1. Let the same be filed in office copy whereof be supplied to the petitioner.
Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, leaned counsel for CDGK states that the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No.1 be treated as the counter affidavit filed by the other officer on behalf of CDGK. Respondent No.7 appearance is dispensed with. Let rejoinder, if any, before the next date.
Adjourned to a date in office. Ad-interim order passed earlier to continue till next date.
J U D G E
J U D G E
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
H.C.A. No.238/2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
30-09-2009:
Mr. Muhammad Umer Lakhani, Advocate for the Petitioners.
- - - - -- - - - - -
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.
3-5. The petitioner has impugned the arbitration proceeding before the respondent No.3. According to the learned counsel the controversy has been purportedly raised in the proceeding, do not touch the business of the society.
Let notice be issued to the society.
J U D G E
J U D G E
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P. No.D-2113/2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
For Katcha Peshi.
30-09-2009:
Mr. Aziz Nishter, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Umer Hayat Sandhu, DAG.
- - - - -- - - - - -
According to the learned counsel the impugned order has since been withdrawn by the DDO concerned, therefore, the purpose of the petition has been achieved. The petition is disposed of as withdrawn with no order as to cost.
J U D G E
J U D G E
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
HCA No.265/2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
30-09-2009:
Ms. Shaista Shamim, Advocate for the Appellant.
Defendant No.1 in person.
Mr. Irfanullah, Advocate for Intervenor.
- - - - -- - - - - -
1. Granted.
2. Granted.
3. Let notice be issued to the appellant and the respondents. Defendant No.1 and appellant waive notice of the application. Defendant No.1 states that he has not received the copies of the appeal and its annexures. Learned counsel for the appellant is directed to provide copies within three days. Let counter affidavit be filed within two weeks thereafter.
Learned counsel for the intervenor undertakes to provide the copy to the other sides within three days.
4. Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.
5-7. Notice has already been served, it may, however, be issued on unserved respondents. In the meantime, the property may remain attach without dispossessing the residents.
J U D G E
J U D G E
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P. No.D-2358/2008
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
For Katcha Peshi.
30-09-2009:
Mr. M. Z. Khan, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Iqbal Kamran, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Shafi Muhammad Memon, Addl. A.G.
Mr. Shaikh Riaz, Advocate for CDGK.
- - - - -- - - - - -
Both the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 3 request for time for filing the comments. Three weeks time for filing the comments has already been given. They are cautioned that if they failed to file the comments before the next date the cost may be imposed.
Adjourned to a date in office.
J U D G E
J U D G E
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P. No.D-2253/2008
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
30-09-2009:
Mr. Ashiq Muhammad, Advocate for the Petitioners.
- - - - -- - - - - -
Since the earlier petition were dismissed and so also the comments filed by the respondent No.2 (Town Nazim). It appears that there are about all the petitioners in respect of the plots at Mianwali Colony, Orangi Town at Sindh Gothabad Scheme and Iqbal Goth respectively.
Learned Addl. A.G. Mr. Shafi Muhammad Memon, who is present in Court in some other cases, will seek confirmation from the authority concerned in the Gothabad Scheme as all the veracity of the claim of the petitioner in respect of all the property. Learned counsel for the petitioners to provide the copy alongwith its annexures to learned A.A.G. In the meanwhile, no coercive action without due process of law be taken against the petitioners.
J U D G E
J U D G E
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P. No.D-214/2007
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
30-09-2009:
Mr. M. Farooque Hashim, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Ghulam Nabi Shaikh, Advocate for the Respondent.
- - - - -- - - - - -
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that KBCA have complied with the orders of the Hon'ble Court and that encroachment has since been removed and accordingly the petition having been served out its purpose.
Needless to say that in case any unauthorized construction is made the KBCA will be at liberty to take action against such unauthorized constructions.
The petition is disposed of in the above terms alongwith all pending applications.
J U D G E
J U D G E
O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
C.P. Nos.D-1945-46/2009
ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE
For Katcha Peshi.
30-09-2009:
Mr. Abbas Ali, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr.Akhter Hussain & Mr.Masood Ghani, Advocates for the Respondent.
Mr. Shafi Muhammad Memon, Addl. A.G. along with DSP Habibullah Jokhio & SSP Malik Waseem, Keamari Town.
- - - - -- - - - - -
Learned Addl. A.G. has filed a copy of the comments of the official respondent. They need not to appear in person. Mr. Akhter Hussain, learned counsel for the private respondent, files power which may be filed in office. Ad-interim order passed earlier to continue.
J U D G E
J U D G E