ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

C.P. No.424 of 2008.

DATE

OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

1. For orders on office objection as Flag ‘A’..

2. For Katcha Peshi.

04.03.2010.

Mr. Faiz Muhammad Larik advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Abdul Hamid Bhurgari, Addl. A. G and Miss Rubina Dhamrah, State Counsel along with Iqbal Ahmed Tunio, City Survey Officer, Larkana and Abdul Salam Memon, City Surveyor, Larkana.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is lawful owner of house with shop and go-down having an area of 850 Sq. feet situated near Darul Aman, Nishter Road Larkana which he purchased from one Mashooque Ali vide agreement dated 01.2.2004. Respondent No.3 was lawfully wedded wife of the petitioner from which marriage respondent no.4 was born. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner divorced respondent no.3 on 05.5.2008. Respondent No.3 & 4 pressurized the petitioner to vacate the property as they wanted to sell it. Learned counsel further submitted that the respondent No.3 forged a document purporting to agreement dated 19.7.2005, which is unregistered document by which it is stated that the petitioner has transferred the property to respondent No.3. Thereafter respondent No.3 entered into agreement with respondent no.5 for sale of property in-question. Learned counsel submitted that the SHO Police Station Hyderi pressurized him to vacate the property and handed over to Muhammad Younis. Respondent No.6 has filed statement stating that dispute between the parties is of civil nature. He further stated that he has not harassed the petitioner for vacation of the property or for any other purpose. Respondent No.6 is directed to ensure that he does not interfere in the matter of dispute between private citizens in respect of property unless some breach of peace is apprehended or some cognizable offence is committed or is apprehended to be committed. As far as the question whether the agreement dated 19.7.2005 is a genuine document and as to whether what is the legal effect of agreement dated 07.6.2008 are concerned the petitioner is at liberty to seek his remedy in the Court of plenary jurisdiction. This Constitutional Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

Judge