Order Sheet

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH KARACHI

 

High Court Appeals No.209 of 2017

 

Date

                                Order with signature of Judge

 

Hearing (Priority) Case :

1. For orders on Misc. No.768/2018 (U/O I R 10 CPC) :

2. For orders on office objection as at “A” :

3. For hearing of Main Case :

4. For hearing of Misc. No.1242/2017 (Stay) :

 

19.10.2018 :    Ms. Rizwana Ismail, advocate for the appellant.

 

   Mr. Muhammad Mushtaq Quadri, advocate for respondent No.1.

 

                           Mr. Nazar Hussain Dhoon, advocate for respondent No.2.

 

                           Mr. Muhammad Sajjad Abbasi, advocate for the intervener.

…………

 

            Suit No.200/2011 was filed by the appellant at the original side of this Court against respondent No.1 for specific performance of contract for sale of immovable property viz. Plot No.44-C, Nishat Lane No.12, Phase VI, Defence Housing Authority, Karachi, measuring 200 sq. yds. The said Suit was decreed on 28.02.2011 with the consent of the parties in view of compromise application filed by them. Thereafter, several applications under Section 12(2) CPC were filed in the said Suit by different parties for setting aside the consent decree passed therein. On 20.02.2017 the Suit came up for orders on CMA No.13469/2016 and hearing of CMA No.170/2016, and the applications under Section 12(2) CPC were also listed separately on that date. The hearing of all applications under Section 12(2) CPC was adjourned by the learned single Judge, however, the impugned order was passed in the Suit. The appellant is aggrieved with only the following part of the impugned order :

 

“Since the plot in question is vacant, it probably will be more beneficial that the said plot be converted into a public park with the name of Fl. Lt. Syed Shamsuddin Ahmed affixed thereto so that at least his name lives as our national hero known to the new generation.”

 

            The above direction has been given through the impugned order in a Suit wherein a consent decree for specific performance in respect of the above plot was already in the field. Learned counsel for the respondents concede that the above direction in the impugned order is not sustainable either in law or on facts. Accordingly, by consent the impugned order is set aside to the extent of the above direction contained therein. The appeal is allowed in the above terms with no order as to costs and the listed applications stand disposed of accordingly.

 

     J U D G E

 

 

J U D G E

*HCA 209-18/19.10.2018/Short Orders DB/Court Work/E*