ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Misc.Appln. No.S-117 of 2012.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

1. For orders on office objection “A”.

2. For hearing of case.

19.11.2018.

                        Mr.Ashfaque Hussain Abro, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr.Asif Ali Abdul Razzak Soomro, Advocate for private respondent

                        Mr.Raja Imtiaz Ali Solangi, A.P.G.

~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- The applicant by way of instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin has impugned order dated 19.06.2012, passed by learned District & Sessions Judge, Qamber-Shahdadkot @ Qamber, the operative part whereof reads as under;

“Since the Faisla was held by an Arbitrator in between the parties and decision is made by an advocate who is also a Court officer, hence I order that a decision made by a Court officer may be implemented”.

                        The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin are that the private respondents made an application with learned District & Sessions Judge, Qamber-Shahdadkot @ Qamber, with the following prayer;

(a       مٿين جوابدار ريسپانڊنٽ مهمد رفيق ولد علي گوهر ڪانڌڙي کي ته هو عرضدار محمد ايوب کي 1575000 هزار روپيه موٽائي ڏي يا وڪرو ڪيل جڳهه جو قبضو ۽ مالڪانه حقوق سميت رجسٽرڊ ڪري ڏي.

(b       مٿيون جوابدار ريسپانڊنٽ کي هدايت ڪئي وڃي ته هو عرضدار کي مختلف طريقن سان ڌمڪيون نه ڏئي.

(c       مٿين جوابدار ريسپانڊنٽ محمد رفيق کان اهڙو لکت ۾ بيان ورتو وڃي ته مان عرضدار محمد ايوب کي ڌمڪيون وغيره نه ڏيندس.

(d       عرضدار جيڪو به حرج خرچ ڪيو آهي اهو ڪورٽ سڳوري ڪاٿو لڳائي ڀري ڏنو وڃي يا جوابدار تي ڪاسٽ لڳائي وڃي.

(e       وڌيڪ ضرورت پوڻ تي ڪورٽ سڳوري جيڪو قانون موجب قدم کڻندي ته انصاف جي بهتري ٿيندي.

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that

 the learned District & Sessions Judge, Qamber-Shahdadkot @ Qamber, was having no jurisdiction to have passed the impugned order, whereby he has adjudicated the civil rights of the parties in summarily manner. By contending so, he sought for reversal of the impugned order.

                        Learned counsel for the private respondent by supporting the impugned order has sought for dismissal of the instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin, as according to him, it is well reasoned.

                        Learned A.P.G did not support the impugned order.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

9.                    There is nothing either in Criminal or Civil Procedure Code, which may authorize or invest jurisdiction upon a District and Sessions Judge to determine the contractual rights of the parties, on a simple application that too in summarily manner under the pretext that the dispute between the parties has been resolved by Arbitrator and Faisla of Arbitrator being officer of the Court is to be implemented. The “jurisdiction” meant a power to hear and decide a legal controversy between the parties which could be vested by law alone and absence of such power would alone be sufficient to render such order as “without jurisdiction”. Reference in that respect may well be placed upon the case of Searle IV Solution (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan 2018 SCMR 1444 (Rel. P-1458) wherein it has been observed by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan that;

“… wherein this Court held that by “jurisdiction” is meant a power to hear and decide a legal controversy between the parties…..

                        In above said circumstances, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicant that learned District & Sessions Judge, Qamber Shahdadkot @ Qamber, has passed the impugned order, in exercise of jurisdiction, which was never invested upon him. It is set aside accordingly.

                        The instant Crl.Misc.Applicatoin is disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE

..