BEFORE THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT, BENCH ABBOTTABAD W.

P No___________ of 2011 Shah Hassan Saeed son of Hussain Shah resident of Jabrian, Tehsil and District AbbottabadPetitioner VERSUS 1. Ghulam Sarwar Son of Haider Jan resident of Banda Sappan, Tehsil and District Abbottabad. 2. Additional District Judge-II,Abbottabad. 3. Civil Judge-XI, Abbottabad. Respondents. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 199 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, 1973. May it please your Lordship!
1. That, Petitioner Promptly performed Talab-e-

Muwathibat in respect of sale affected vide registered sale deed No.935 dated 14.05.2007 on the information of one Muhammad Rafique son of Mir Hussain resident of Jabrian, Tehsil and District Abbottabad in his presence, the moment he disclosed about the suit sale.
2. That, thereafter, petitioner engaged a senior

counsel Haji Ghulam Basit, Advocate Supreme court of Pakistan and dispatched Notice Talab-

e-

Ishhaad

through

him

to

the

vendee/respondent.

3. That actul name of father of Mr. Muhammad

Rafique is Mir Hussain, which alphabet of ( ) was inadvertantly added by the learneed ) which caused counsel before the word (

the whole confusion and thus it was written as Akhtar Hussain in Para 3 of Notice Talab-eIshhaad is indicative of this fact which is a clerical mistake purely and simply. Copy of the notice Talab-e-ishhaad is annexed as annexureA
4. That petitioner is lodged at Islamabad in

connection with his service, while the plaint was drafted by the learned counsel and inserted the fathers name of infromer from foot of the notice. The Petitioner signed the verifcation without going through the contents of plaint. Likewise, the list of witnesses was also prepared from the palint by the clerk and was signed by the learned counsel. Copy of plaint and writen statement is annexed as annexure B & C respectively.
5. That, when this clerical mistake came into the

notice, learned counsel for the petitioner filed application for correction of fathers name of informer Muhammad Rafique supported by his personal affidavit, with a clean breast offer that

if any person of the name of Muhammad Rafique son of Akhtar Hussain resident of Jabrian, Tehsil & District Abbottabad is proved to be in existence, the suit of premptor/petitioner is lieable to be dismissed on this score alone. Muhammad Rafique and Muhammad Javed also tendered affidavits to which vague affidavits in rebuttal were also filed. Copies of application, replication and affidavits are annexed as annexure D E, F & G respectively.
6. That,

learned Civil Judge, dismissed the application on extraneous

Petitioners considerations.

Copy of the order is annexed as annexure H

7. That, feeling aggrieved of the order of learned

Civil Judge, petitioner filed revision petition in the court of District Judge which was entrusted to respondent No.2. learned Addittional District Judge-II, who was pleased to dismiss the Revision Petiton and upheld the order of respondent No.3. Copies of Memo of Revision Petition and Judgement are annexed as annexure I & J respectively.
8. That, petitioner assails the impugned orders

and seeks the gracious indulgence of this

Honourable Court, inter alia, on the following grounds:-

GROUNDS That, impugned orders of both the

i.

lower courts are wrong, illegal, arbitrary and perverse, which are offending all norms of justice. That, procedural laws are always

ii.

meant to advance the cause of justice. Those are never supposed to entrap the litigant in the blind corner of technicalities and to non suit them. That it is clearly mentioned in Para

iii.

3 of Notice Talab-e-Ishhaad that fathers name of Muhammad Rafique informer is Mir Hussain with slight and inadvertant addition of ( ) while on the foot of notice Akhtar Hussain is written out of inadvertence. Actually strokes of words Amir and Akhtar in urdu writing are the same with slight and sole difference of dots which in Akhtars case are on head while in Amirs in bottom. This is the sole technical confussion which has

engulfed the whole pre-emption suit and very superior and substantive rights of petitioner.

iv.

That, counsel of pertitioner had

made an offer in unequivocal terms in his affidavit that if it is proved in trial that there is an other perosn of the name of Muhammad Rafique son of Akhtar Hussain resident of Village Jabrian, Tehsil and District Abbottabad, my suit should be dismissed, then there was no lawful excuse to reject petitioners application. That, petitioner reiterates the same

v.

offer before this august court that if respondent succeeds in establishing that there is another man living in village Jabrian with the name of Muhammad Rafique son of Akhtar Hussain, my suit should be dismissed solely on this ground. That, respondent No 1 learned

vi.

Additional District Judge has made an observation in his order that: if the

correct

name

of

the

father

of

Muhammad Rafique is Mir Hussain he may clarify this fact at the time of his statement before the learned trial court.but thereafter he dismissed Revision Petition instead of allowing it . vii. That, tribunals or courts are vested

with jurisdication to decide the matters rightly not wrongly. Whenever the court errs in law while deciding the lis, it goes wrong amenable in law rendering its orders to writ jurisdication of

Honourable High Court. viii. That, had the lower courts gone

through the body of notice Talab-eIshhaad , especially para No.3 of the notice, they would have never concluded that in all the three documents fathers name of Muhammad Rafique is Akhtar Hussain. So in the given backdrop of events, it is clear case of total nonreading of record and non adherence to the law applicable there to.

ix.

That, the petitioner has got no other

adequate remedly avaiable except the constitutional jurisdication of this august court.