Abdul Baseer C.R in D.J

BEFORE THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, PESHAWAR
Revision Petition No.__________/2011
Abdul Baseer S/o Khuda Bakhsh,

DFO/ DDP Environment Department
Civil Secretariat, Peshawar…………………………………...Petitioner
VERSUS
1. Sanaullah S/o Munir Khan
R/o House No.B-IV, Forest Management Colony,
University Campus, Peshawar…………………………Respondent
2. Secretary Environment Department,

K.P.K, Peshawar
3. Chief Conservator of Forest,

K.P.K, Peshawar
4. Conservator of Forest,
FP&M Circle, Peshawar
5. Dr. Ayaz Khattak,

Director Pakistan Institute, Peshawar
6. Station House Officer,

P.S University Campus, Peshawar………..Proforma Respondents
Civil Revision Petition under Section

115 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
against the impugned order and
judgment dated 07.02.2011 passed by
the learned Civil Judge-III, Peshawar,
whereby an application under Order-
7 Rule-11 for the rejection of plaint,
filed by petitioner/ defendant No.1,
was turned down, being premature.
Prayer in Petition:
On acceptance of this revision petition, the order/ judgment

dated 07.02.2011 of the learned Civil Judge-III, Peshawar may
kindly be set aside and the plaint of the plaintiff/ respondent
No.1 may kindly be rejected.
Respectfully Sheweth:
1. That the respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as plaintiff)

had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction in the
court of learned Civil Judge-III, Peshawar against the present
petitioner and remaining respondents to the effect that through
Office Letter No.1308/RA/PK/Accommodation dt.30.11.2010,
the government accommodation is duly allotted to him.
Alongwith the plaint an application for interim injunction had
also been moved asking the court to restrain the defendants from
the vacation of the disputed house till the final disposal of the
suit. (Copies of Plaint, application for interim injunction are
enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure “A” & “B”
respectively).
2. That in response to the aforesaid suit, the defendants appeared

and contested the suit by filing their respective written
statements and replications and the learned trial court after
hearing the parties was pleased to vacate the injunctive orders
already been granted to the plaintiff. (Copies of the written
statements, replications and orders are enclosed herewith and
marked as Annexure “C, D & E” receptively).
3. That besides, all these the present petitioner/ defendant No.1 had
also been moved an application under Order-7 Rule-11 of Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying the court to reject the plaint of
plaintiff being in bereft of cause of action and barred by law.
(Copy of application is enclosed herewith and marked as
Annexure “F”).
4. That after receiving the replications and tendering the arguments

of the learned counsels, the learned Civil Judge-III, Peshawar
was pleased to dismiss the petitioner’s application. (Copies of
replications and orders impugned are enclosed herewith and
marked as Annexure “G” & “H” respectively).
5. That feeling deeply aggrieved from the findings of the courts

below, the petitioner seeks the indulgence of this Honourable
Court, inter alia, on the following grounds:
G R O U N D S:
A. That the findings of the courts below are totally perverse,

against the law, facts and material available on case file, hence
liable to be set aside.
B. That from the bare perusal of the plaint, it unequivocally

suggests that it does not disclose any cause of action.
C. What is much notable that the declaration has sought for

determination of allotment of government accommodation, thus
the plaintiff does not have any “Legal Character” or “Right
into the Property”.
D. That even otherwise, the plaintiff’s suit is badly barred by law
and liable to be struck down.
E. It is a settled principle of law that if a person is not entitled to

the main relief, he cannot be awarded with the consequential
relief, flowing from the main relief.
F. What is irksome to note that the plaintiff has produced an

illegal, bogus and self-fabricated allotment letter for institution
of the suit and misguided, deceived and even defrauded the
learned trial court by taking temporary injunction to this effect.
G. That the findings of the courts below are not only deficient in
their contents but are hallow and frail in substance. Grave
miscarriage of justice is resulting to the present petitioner
flowing from the orders and judgment impugned herein because
actually the disputed house has duly allotted to the present
petitioner.
H. It is pertinent to highlight that the learned trial court did not pay
any attention towards the point that the office letter
No.1308/RA/PK/Accommodation dated 30.11.2010 has been
quashed by the competent authorities.
I. That the impugned orders also did not find mention the fact that
in the light of policy letter No.EO(Admn)34-M/2010 dated
27.03.2010 duly issued from the Administration Department of
K.P.K, Peshawar, the respondent No.1/ plaintiff is not entitled to
the government accommodation at Peshawar being on
deputation at Malakand.
J. That any other ground which may be raised during the course of
arguments, with the kind permission of this Honourable Court.
It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that on acceptance of

this revision petition, the order/ judgment dated 07.02.2011 of
the learned Civil Judge-III, Peshawar may kindly be set aside
and the plaint of plaintiff/ respondent No.1 may kindly be
rejected.
Petitioner
Through
Faheem Marwat
Date: __/__/2011 Advocate High Court
AFFIDAVIT
I, Abdul Baseer S/o Khuda Bakhsh, DFO/ DDP Environment
Department Civil Secretariat, Peshawar, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare on oath that the contents of the accompanying Revision Petition
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing
has been kept secret from this Hon’ble Court.
Identified by: DEPONENT
Faheem Marwat
Advocate High Court, Peshawar
BEFORE THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, PESHAWAR
Revision Petition No.__________/2011
Abdul Baseer……………………………………………………Petitioner
VERSUS
Sanaullah and others…………………………………………Respondents
INDEX
S.No Description of Documents Annex Pages
1. Grounds of revision petition with affidavit 1-5
2. Copies of Plaint & application for interim A-B
injunction
3. Copies of the written statements, C, D, E
replications and orders
4. Copy of application under Order-7 Rule-11 F
5. Copies of replications and orders impugned G-H
6. Wakalat Nama
Petitioner
Through
Faheem Marwat
Date: __/__/2011 Advocate High Court
Cell: 0321-9650538

Abdul Baseer C.R in D.J

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abdul Baseer C.R in D.J

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abdul Baseer C.R in D.J

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BEFORE THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, PESHAWAR

Revision Petition No.__________/2011

Abdul Baseer S/o Khuda Bakhsh,

2. Secretary Environment Department,

3. Chief Conservator of Forest,

5. Dr. Ayaz Khattak,

6. Station House Officer,

Civil Revision Petition under Section

On acceptance of this revision petition, the order/ judgment

1. That the respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as plaintiff)

2. That in response to the aforesaid suit, the defendants appeared

4. That after receiving the replications and tendering the arguments

5. That feeling deeply aggrieved from the findings of the courts

A. That the findings of the courts below are totally perverse,

B. That from the bare perusal of the plaint, it unequivocally

C. What is much notable that the declaration has sought for

E. It is a settled principle of law that if a person is not entitled to

F. What is irksome to note that the plaintiff has produced an

It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that on acceptance of

Identified by: DEPONENT

Revision Petition No.__________/2011

You might also like