ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,
CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD.
Criminal Revision Application No.S-116 of 2010
DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE
1. FOR ORDERS ON OFFICE OBJECTION.
2. FOR ORDERS ON MA NO.3539/2010.
3. FOR KATCHA PESHI.
4. FOR ORDERS ON MA NO.3540/2010.
10-10-2011
Mr. Shaukat Ali Pathan, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, A.P.G Sindh.
……….
Through this Criminal Revision Application, the applicant has assailed the order dated 28-09-2010, passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Complaint No.51 of 2010 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the application preferred by the applicant against the order dated 23-08-2010, whereby through the interim order the applicant was directed to hand over the possession of the property in dispute to the applicant.
It is interalia contended that the impugned order has been passed in haste, mechanical manner and without taking into consideration the documents. Per learned counsel the applicant has purchased the disputed property from one Gulzar Ahmed through sale agreement but that aspect was ignored by the Additional Sessions Judge while passing the impugned order.
Perusal of the impugned order reflects that on 23-08-2010, the applicant was directed to hand over the possessions of the property in dispute to the respondent and such order was passed on the basis of documents viz. lease deed dated 10-11-2008 in the name of opponent’s wife as well as the report of the concerned S.H.O. Whereas the applicant is claiming his possession over the property on the basis of sale agreement. On query, learned counsel very candidly conceded that except the above sale agreement the applicant does not have any other document to show his nexus with the disputed property. Admittedly sale agreement does not create any right or title or ownership.
In view of above, instant Criminal Revision Application is dismissed in limini along with listed applications.
JUDGE
A.C