ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

R. A. No. S – 39 of 2019

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

Fresh case

1. For orders on office objections at Flag-A

2. For hearing of main case

3. For orders on CMA No.176/2019

(Relevant document not filed)

22.04.2019

Mr. Illahi Bux Jamali, Advocate for the applicant.

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

Today, yet again the counsel has come unprepared. He sought adjournment on the last date on the ground that perhaps he was not aware of the article applicable on the proceedings. Earlier, a suit was filed in the year 2014 wherein plaint was rejected under Order VII Rule 11, CPC. The cause accrued to him in the year 2011. He claimed that the entry in pursuance of a sale deed be cancelled. He then filed a subsequent suit in the year 2017 with the same relief. Para 16 of the plaint provides that the cause accrued to him in November 2011. He was aware of a registered instrument, which was executed in the year 2011, for which he earlier filed a suit wherein plaint was rejected for the reasons mentioned therein. Whatever the case may be, a subsequent suit was filed in the year 2017, by which date the time has already lapsed.

On the last date, the Court observed, as argued by him, that Article 92 would apply. Article 92 is for a declaration regarding forgery in an instrument, which too provides a period of three (03) years. This is not a forgery in the instrument itself. A challenge was made of sale deed itself and, hence, this suit was belatedly filed and the plaint was rightly rejected as being barred by time. No exception is available as argued.

The Revision Application is dismissed along with listed application with cost of Rs.3,000/- (Three thousand) to be deposited with the High Court Clinic.

J U D G E

Abdul Basit