Abuse of Court Process and Imposition of Exemplary Costs for Illegal Possession.
مقدمے کا پس منظر
عدالتی کارروائی کو طول دینے کا طرزِ عمل
ناجائز قبضہ اور آئینی حقِ ملکیت
عدالتی عمل کے ناجائز استعمال کی نشاندہی
مثالی اخراجات عائد کرنے کا اصول
اخراجات کو جائیداد پر چارج قرار دینا
انصاف کے نظام کا تحفظ
نتیجہ
Must read Judgement
2024 S C M R 89
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Qazi Faez Isa, C.J., Amin-ud-Din Khan and Athar Minallah, JJ
JAVED HAMEED and others---Petitioners
Versus
AMAN ULLAH and others---Respondents
Civil Petition No.1990-L of 2017, decided on 10th November, 2023.
(Against the judgment dated 3 May 2017 passed by Lahore High Court Multan Bench, Multan in Civil Revision No.133-D of 2017)
(a) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Art. 23---Protracted litigation---Plaintiff dragging out litigation to continue illegal possession over defendant's property---Costs, imposition of---Suit was filed by plaintiffs-petitioners on 16 September 2009 and was dismissed on 30 April 2016, that is, after a period of about 7 years---Perusal of order sheets of the trial court showed that despite repeated opportunities the petitioners-plaintiffs did not come forward to give evidence---Despite having lost thrice (in the for a below) the petitioners deemed it fit to file a frivolous petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court---Petitioners were in possession of the suit property and the apparent reason for dragging out the litigation was that the petitioners-plaintiffs were in illegal possession of land and their possession continued till date---By such tactics the respondents-defendants were deprived of their properties; their fundamental right, enshrined in Article 23 of the Constitution, to hold and dispose of property, violated, and the process of the court abused to procrastinate matters indefinitely by the petitioners who were in possession and had no intention to relinquish possession of the respondents' land---Courts must be vigilant that the process of the court is not abused, and ensure that legitimate owners are not deprived of their properties---From the date of filing of the suit till date 14 years had elapsed, and petitioners who were not entitled to the said land continue in possession of it, probably thinking there would no consequences for their actions---Such an impression must be corrected---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs of one million rupees with the direction that such amount shall constitute a charge on the property of the petitioners till such time the said amount was paid, and the petitioners shall handover the peaceful possession of the said land to the respondents.
(b) Administration of justice---
----Costs, imposition of---Courts must impose costs whenever it is required, stem frivolous litigation and stop the abuse of the process of the court in perpetuating wrongdoing.
Syed Muhammad Ali Gillani, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents