Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    Injunction Against Co-Sharer

    Uploaded by

    Asim Hafeez
    The document discusses rules related to granting temporary injunctions in legal cases. It summarizes 3 court cases where: 1) A co-owner was restricted from constructing a building on jointly owned land until partition, to protect the interests of both parties. 2) A co-owner was not allowed to alter the nature of jointly owned land or use it differently than intended, without permission from other co-owners. 3) Courts are justified in setting aside injunction orders with directions to provide security, to balance the interests of both parties in a dispute over jointly owned land.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Injunction Against Co-Sharer

    Uploaded by

    Asim Hafeez
    2K views4 pages
    The document discusses rules related to granting temporary injunctions in legal cases. It summarizes 3 court cases where: 1) A co-owner was restricted from constructing a building on jointly owned land until partition, to protect the interests of both parties. 2) A co-owner was not allowed to alter the nature of jointly owned land or use it differently than intended, without permission from other co-owners. 3) Courts are justified in setting aside injunction orders with directions to provide security, to balance the interests of both parties in a dispute over jointly owned land.

    Original Title

    Injunction Against Co-sharer

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses rules related to granting temporary injunctions in legal cases. It summarizes 3 court cases where: 1) A co-owner was restricted from constructing a building on jointly owned land until partition, to protect the interests of both parties. 2) A co-owner was not allowed to alter the nature of jointly owned land or use it differently than intended, without permission from other co-owners. 3) Courts are justified in setting aside injunction orders with directions to provide security, to balance the interests of both parties in a dispute over jointly owned land.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    2K views4 pages

    Injunction Against Co-Sharer

    Uploaded by

    Asim Hafeez
    The document discusses rules related to granting temporary injunctions in legal cases. It summarizes 3 court cases where: 1) A co-owner was restricted from constructing a building on jointly owned land until partition, to protect the interests of both parties. 2) A co-owner was not allowed to alter the nature of jointly owned land or use it differently than intended, without permission from other co-owners. 3) Courts are justified in setting aside injunction orders with directions to provide security, to balance the interests of both parties in a dispute over jointly owned land.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 4

    • Home

    • Words & Phrases


    • Legal Terms
    • Topics
    • Maxims
    • Profile
    • Site Map
    • Account Status

    • Help
    Search within Results :

    Control Your Search by Selecting Court and Book Name :

    Your Search for Topic () returned 17 individual Titles.

    Now Displaying : Page 1-2

    Citation Name : 2010 CLC 285 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE


    Side Appellant : ABDUL GHAFFAR
    Side Opponent : WAQAS HAFEEZ

    O. XXXIX, Rr.1 & 2---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.8---Suit for possession---Family partition
    ---No nexus or connection with disputed land---Effect---Plain tiff filed suit for possession through
    partition along with an application for temporary in junction claimin g therein that the plain tiff bein g
    co-sharer in the disputed property could not be deprived of use of his share as he was entitled to and
    had a proprietary in terest in every in ch of the undivided Khata---Defendants contested suit on the
    ground that as a result of family partition the defendants were in possession of the disputed land out of
    total land in join t Khata for the last 25 years and that the plain tiff had no nexus or connection with the
    said partition ---Trial Court dismissed application for restrain in g order again st defendant---Appellate
    Court on appeal also dismissed the same---Validity---Record revealed that the suit was at prelimin ary
    stage---Right of the plain tiff in the disputed land and its extent had yet to be determin ed by recordin g
    of evidence---Defendants were in exclusive possession of the disputed property for the past 25 years on
    the basis of family partition ---Prima facie case in favour of the plain tiff was not clearly made out---
    Defendants had in vested huge sums of money in construction of CNG Station and in stallation of
    equipment and machin ery thereon---Order restrain in g defendants from operatin g the CNG Station
    would cause in convenience to them more compared to the plain tiff who had no nexus or connection
    with the disputed land for the past 25 years---Loss, if any, would be calculated in monetary terms---in
    gredient of irrepairable loss was missin g in the suit---Plain tiff had failed to show any illegality or
    material irregularity committed by subordin ate courts in exercise of jurisdiction vested in them---
    Petition was dismissed by High Court.

    Citation Name : 2009 CLC 1136 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE


    Side Appellant : ABDULLAH
    Side Opponent : Mst. SAIDAN BIBI

    S. 144---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Application for


    restitution---Scope---Petitioners, in the present case, had in itiated litigation as plain tiffs claimin g a
    decree for declaration and permanent in junction---Provision of S.144, C.P.C. is based on fundamental
    prin ciples of law that an act of court should not in jure any person---Restitution is ordered again st the
    holder of the decree who, in execution thereof, has deprived the opposite party of some benefits and
    Citation Name : 1995 PLD 462 SUPREME-COURT

    Side Appellant : HAJI SHAHJAHAN KHAN


    Side Opponent : AURANGZEB KHAN

    Constitution of Pakistan 1973 0. XXXIX, Rr.l & 2---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)--
    Temporary in junction---Grant of---Join tly owned land---One of the co-sharer s wanted to construct a
    house on a portion of such land---Other co-sharer s objected to such construction and filed suit for in
    junction on the ground that the property was join tly owned by the parties, therefore, the co-sharer be
    restrain ed from raisin g any construction till such time that regular partition of the land took place---
    Numerous mutations of sale had been sanctioned of small pieces of land, out of the suit Khasra number
    for construction purposes and after carvin g out Tatimmas houses had been constructed on such land--
    Even portion of the land in possession of tie co-sharer (who wanted to construct the house) was earlier
    sold by one of the co-sharer s who later sold it to him (the co-sharer )---Land in question, thus, had its
    own identity from rest of the land in suit---High Court, therefore, was justified to set aside that order of
    in junction in favour of co-sharer s who objected the construction of house by the other co-sharer with
    direction to the co-sharer who wanted to construct the house to furnish security to the effect that he
    would remove the construction in case of success of the other co-sharer s regardin g the suit land---
    Order of High Court bein g in conformity with the law, givin g sufficient safeguard to the in terest of
    both the parties, Supreme Court declin ed in terference and dismissed the petition for leave to appeal.

    Citation Name : 1994 CLC 2409 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP


    Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD ASHIQ
    Side Opponent : ABDUL JALIL USMAN

    co-sharer ----Entitlement of co-sharer to construct on join t property ---Suit for in junction restrain in
    g defendant from raisin g constructions on the join tly owned land decreed ---Legality---co-sharer could
    not, ordin arily be permitted to alter the nature of join t property , and to put it to different use from the
    one for which it was in tended---Neither defendant nor his vendor had been able to establish exclusive
    possession over the land in question, defendant therefore, could not use it to lay foundation thereon---
    Even if defendant/co-sharer had been in possession of land in question, still he could not raise
    construction thereon, without consultin g other co-sharer or partition of land

    Citation Name : 1994 MLD 550 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE


    Side Appellant : FAZAL DIN
    Side Opponent : UMAR BIBI

    Civil Procedure Code --Order XXXIX of C.P.C. Temporary in junctions and in terlocutory Orders
    ----OXXXIX, Rr.1 & 2 & S.115---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.54--Temporary in junction---Grant
    Copyright Oratier Technologies (Pvt.) Ltd.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy