IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT LAHORE

C.M.No ____________2016
IN
W.P No.

/2013

Taimur Hussain Versus Faisalabad Development

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF

CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 FOR RECALLING OF ORDER
DATED 08.04.2015 AND REHEARIBG OF THE WRIT
PETITION

Respectfully Sheweth;
1.

That

through

this

applicant / petitioner

application,

the

seeks recalling of

the order dated 08.04.2015

and permission

to withdraw the statement of the petitioner

reflected in the above order whereby, the
petitioner withdrew the writ petition for
the time being through application C.M No 1

of 2015. Copy of the order and application

are attached as Annex A.
2.

That

the

present

facts

giving

application

rise

are

that

to

file

the

the

subject

property of the writ petition was owned by

__________

and

_________

jointly

who

alienated the same to the present applicant

and

after

their

demise,

an

agreement

to

sell dated ___________was executed between

the

petitioner

respondent

and

filed

the
suit

respondent.
for

the

The

specific

performance of the agreement stating some

distorted facts and in alternative, claimed
recovery

of

Rs

_________

of

allegedly

written

statement

distorted

averments

remaining earnest amount.

3.

The

petitioner

controverting
however

in

filed
those

para

three

of

the

written

statement, admitted the agreement to sell

with objection that the said agreement to
sell was later recinded / cancelled between
the parties through a revocation agreement
dated 21.05.2000 executed and signed by the
respondent through which she had received
the

earnest

amount

of

Rs

12,00,000/-

abd

that

neither

specific

she

is

performance

entitled

nor

to

entitled

the

to

the

recovery of any amount.

4.

That the learned trial court framed certain

issues however, on bases of the para No 3
of the written statement, an issue No 4-A
was framed additionally which is reproduced
as under

5.

That after framing of additional issue, the

respondent filed an application under order
XV111

rule

dismissed

1
by

C.P.C
the

which

learned

application
trial

was

court

on

25.06.2012 which was assailed in revision

bythe

respondent

accepted

against

which
which,

revision

was

present

writ

the

petition was filed.

6.

That it is pertainent to mention here that

earlier

to

owners

the

tried

transaction
petitioner
against

to
with

filed

them

deviate
the

the

from

original
the

petitioner

sale

so

the

suit

for

decleration

which

suit

was

decreed

of

the

their

demise,
the

suit,

favour

assailed

above

petitioner,
the

consent

however,

present
decree

in

after

respondent
up

to

this

Honourable Court in Civil revision No 1719

of 2010 through her special attorney / her
husband

Ali

Muhammad

who

is

Qanungo.In

this civil revision, the said Ali Muhammad

appeared

in

this

Honourable

Court

on

________ and made a statement and upon the

statement, her civil revision was finally
dismissed

by

this

Honourable

Court.

The

statement is reproduced as under

7.

That after Ali Muhammad made the statement,

the present respondent through her Attorney
Ali

Muhammad

filed

an

application

for

fixation of her suit for appointment of a

Referee on the bases of compromise and a
jointly

consented

Irshad

Ahmad

Ghulam

Farid

for

Malik

appointment

Advocate

Advocate

order

sheet

(i)

(ii)

Malik

(III)Malik

Naeem

Ahzhar Advocate as referee

in

of

dated

duly reflacted
27.02.2015

and

31.05.1015. The learned trial court issued

order of personal appearnece of respondent
Haleema
hence

Bibi
her

but

she

statement

through

local

while

consenting

was
was

commission
the

reportidly
got
in

sick

recorded

which,

she

appointment,

introduced two other persons Tariq Naveed

Hassan

Advocate

and

Syed

Irshad

Hussain

Shah Advocate as additional referees upon

which, the petitioner has filed objections.
The said suit was dismissed in default and
restoration application was

filed after 1

year which is pending adjudication.

8.

That it was in the light of para no 7 that

the

petitioner

this

filed

Honourable

pending

application

Court

stating

before

factum

of

arbitration and withdrew thw writ

petition

for

the

time

being

believing

on

the compromise.
9.

and

. however, while filing the written

statement,

the

petitioner

admitted

the

applicant / petitioner seeks his remedy on

the following amoungst other
the addresses of the parties have correctly
been given in the head note of the petition
for the purpose of summoning and notices.
10. That

the

facts

giving

rise

to

the

institution of the writ petition are that

one

Muhammad

owner

of

his

Liaqat

Hayat

inherited

Khan

property

was
/

the
land

measuring 20-squares in Chak No. 220 R.B,

Tehsil and District Faisalabad who decided
to develop a housing scheme thereon under
the name and style of Liaqat Town and got
his

Town

approved

Development
public

from

Authority

amenity

plots

the

Faisalabad

after
and

earmarking

roads.

Liaqat

Hayat Khan chalked out a superimposed plan

of his scheme comprising of 40-plots after
chalking tatima jaats of the scheme. Out
of these plots, a plot No. 19/40 (subject
plot)

measuring

13-Marlas

Sarsai

was

purchased by the petitioner in Khewat No.

12469, Khatoni No. 12942 in Square No. 65,
Qila

No.

through

registered

sale

deeds

vide mutation No. 114256, 114257.

11. That

adjoining

subject

at

the

plot purchased

rear

side

of

the

by the petitioner,

there exist a marriage hall under the name

and style of Raza Marriage Hall, who was
interested in the plot No. 19/40 for their
parking use. When the petitioner purchased
the said plot, the owners of the marriage
hall

approached

the

petitioner

and

pressurized the petitioner to sell the plot

to them for a low rate and upon the refusal

of the petitioner, they became vindictive
and

joined

Nawaz

hands

local

with

MPA

pressurizing

one

and

and

Malik

started

Muhammad

harassing,

blackmailing

the

petitioner.
12. That upon the political pressure and undue
influence of the said MPA, the F.D.A wrote
a

letter

to

Faisalabad
dated
and

the

Tehsildar

vide

19/1

to

of

No.

153/TP-II/FDA

asking

for

the

square

19/40

City

letter

10.06.2016

details

(Revenue)

(the

No.
plot

65,

site

map

Qilla

No.

owned

by

the

petitioner)through Revenue Field Staff.

13. That

the

patwari

Revenue

Field

concerned

vide

20.06.2016

submitted

owners

of

Square

Liaqat

Town

at

Staff

his

No.
spot

through

report
report

65

have

and

the

dated

that

the

developed

got

prepared

tatimas. It was also averred in report that

Qila No. 19 vide mutation No. 21011 dated
19.02.1984 is also included in Liaqat Town
and 40-plots have been carved out, in which
plot

No.

transferred

19/36
to

the

to

19/39

Municipal

have

been

Corporation

Faisalabad

vide

12.08.1992,

mutation

whereas

No.

Khasra

41739

dated

No.

19/40

measuring 13 Marlas 1 Sarsais have been

transferred to Taimur Hussain (petitioner)
vide

Registry

No.

19119

and

19120

dated

20.10.2014 and Mutation No. 114256, 114257

dated

25.02.2015

have

been

effected.

The

report also clarified that Khasra No. 19/40

(subject plot No. 19/40) is nowhere shown
as parking or a public park.
14. That

in

order

to

protect

his

possession,

the petitioner filed an application to the

Faisalabad
decided
plot

Development

to

and

raise

collected

Authority

boundary
the

and

wall

material

also

of

his

but

the

owners of Raza Marriage Hall in connivance

with the said MPA kept on pressurizing and
harassing the petitioner due to which the
petitioner was constrained to file a civil
suit seeking injunction against the owners
of the marriage hall on 10.10.2016 and got
a stay order. The owners of the marriage
hall took away the material for which the
petitioner
registration

has

filed

of

criminal

application

for

case

SHO

to

the

Jhang

Bazar

Faisalabad

vide

Diary

No.

10935JP dated 13.10.2016 but no action was

taken due to the political pressure if MPA.
The

petitioner

proceedings
marriage

has

against

hall

initiated
the

and

contempt

owners

during

of

this

the
time

constructed the boundary wall of his plot.

15. That suddenly on 14.10.2016 the demolition
staff of F.D.A appeared at the spot in the
company of local police and demolished the
boundary

wall

possession

and

of

the

forcibly

plot

of

took

the

the

petitioner

claiming it to be a public amenity plot /

park under the garb of a letter No. 70-PADIR-TP-FDA-16
written

by

dated

Deputy

28.07.2016
Director

which

Town

is

Planning

(ll) F.D.A to the DCO Faisalabad. A minute

study

of

this

letter

reveals

that

this

letter is regarding another plot measuring

11

Marlas

Sarcaies,

which

is

situated

neihbouring to the plot of the petitioner,

which

is

in

fact

public

amenity

plot

meant for park and is vacant at the spot.

16. That the letter dated 28.07.2016 does not
pertain to the plot of the petitioner which

is 13-Marlas 1 Sarsai and is inoperative

qua the possessory and proprietary rights
of the petitioner over plot No. 19/40 and
the respondents have got no lawful right or
excuse to apply the same on the plot of the
petitioner.

The

case

of

the

petitioners

ownership has already been verified through

the

earlier

city

report

of

Faisalabad

Tehsildar

Revenue

Patwari

dated

and

20.06.2016 but the letter dated 28.07.2016

has

illegally,

being

unlawfully

imposed

upon

and

the

malafidely

plot

of

the

petitioner in order to grab the same for

the benefit of the owners of the marriage
hall, who have joined hands with the said
MPA

and

is

after

the

plot

No.

19/40

for

their parking purposes. It is pertinent to

mention

here

that

the

letter

dated

28.07.2016 was not in the knowledge of the

petitioner and the petitioner was taken by
surprise

till

demolition

staff

wall

and

petitioner

14.10.2016

took
has

demolished
the

filed

when
the

boundary

possession.
an

the

application

The
for

registeration

of

criminal

proceedings

against all concerned but all in vain.

17. That earlier on 09.06.2003, the Liaqat Town
Welfare

Society

declaration

against

maintaining
deliver

filed

that

suit

for

Liaqat

Liaqat

Hayat

Hayat

did

not

mortgaged 20% public amenity plots

to the F.D.A as per rules and regulations

due

to

which

the

society

is

facing

problems. In this suit, the F.D.A appeared

as

PW4

and

after

framing

of

issues,

the

suit of the Liaqat Town Welfare Society was

decreed on 13.12.2012. Copy of judgment and
decree is attached. The specific point is
that

plot

measuring

11-Marlas

Sarcies

was also a part and parcel of the suit. The

letter

dated

28.07.2016

and

judgment

decree

dated

13.12.2012

clearly

and

indicates

that plot measuring 11-Marlas 4 Sarcies is

another plot which is the subject matter of
the letter and not Plot No. 19/40 which is
13 Marlas 1 Sarcies.
18. That

the

illegal

petitioner
and

respondents

is

unlawful
who

under

aggrieved
acts
the

of
of

the
the

political

pressure
the

of

Malik

owners

causing

of

not

Muhammad

Raza
only

Nawaz

MPA

and

Marriage

Hall

are

harassment

to

the

petitioner but are also trying to grab the

plot

No.

adopting

19/40
illegal

of

the

means

petitioner

by

are

to

and

trying

change the record and nature of the subject

plot No. 19/40 which is earlier verified by
the report

Tehsildar City Faisalabad and

Patwari dated 28.07.2016.

19. That

the

respondents

are

continuing

to

their nefarious illegal designs and motives

and are continuously extending threats to
the petitioner and are eager to change the
nature

of

the

plot

No.

19/40

from

residential plot into a public amenity plot

/ park which acts of the respondents are
illegal, unlawful, against the law, without
lawful

authority,

whimsical,

illegal exercise of
and

unconstitutional.

amounting

to

jurisdiction / powers
The

right

to

hold

property of the petitioner as guaranteed by

the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 have been
violated.
being

The

given

to

discriminatory
the

petitioner

treatment
and

the

petitioner
complying

is

being

with

the

victimized

requirements

for
of

not
Malik

Muhammad Nawaz MPA. It is reiterated that

the
dated

letter

No.

28.07.2016

70-PA-DIR-DP-II/FDA/2016
does

not

relate

to

the

plot of the petitioner and is inoperative

qua the rights of the petitioner.
20. That if the imposition of the letter NO.
70-PA-DIR-DP-II/FDA/2016

dated

28.07.2016

issued by the Deputy Director FDA upon the

plot of the petitioner is not declared as
illegal,

unlawful,

whimsical,

malafide,

arbitrary and unconstitutional and if the

respondents

are

not

restrained

from

changing the nature of the plot NO. 19/40

and are not directed to vacate the plot NO.
19/40

and

deliver

the

same

back

to

the

petitioner, the petitioner shall bound to

suffer an irreparable loss and injury.
21. That

the

petitioner

has

got

no

other

alternate, adequate speedy and efficacious

remedy except to invoke the extra ordinary
jurisdiction of this Honble Court for the
redressal of his grievance.
PRAYER

In view of the submissions made above, it

is

respectfully

prayed

that

instant

writ

petition may kindly be accepted, the acts of

the

respondents

may

kindly

be

declared

as

illegal, unlawful, against the law, malafide,

without lawful authority, whimsical, result of
illegally

exercised

jurisdiction

and

unconstitutional.
It is also prayed that the imposition of
letter

No.

70-PA-DIR-DP-II/FDA/2016

dated

28.07.2016 issued by the Deputy Director Town

Planning F.D.A upon the plot of the petitioner
may

kindly

be

declared

as

illegal,

unlawful,

unconstitutional, malafide and inoperative qua

the rights of the petitioner over the subject
plot No. 19/40 and the same may kindly be setaside to the extent of the petitioners

plot

No 19/40 and consequently the respondents may

kindly

be

deliver

directed
the

to

vacant

vacate

the

possession

plot

and

to

the

petitioner.
It is lastly prayed that operation of
the

letter

28.07.2016

NO.

70-PA-DIR-DP-II/FDA/2016

may

kindly

be

suspended

to

dated
the

extent of the petitioners plot NO. 19/40 and

the respondents may kindly be restrained from

changing
from

the

taking

nature

of

coercieve

the

subject

and

plot

adverse

and

action

against the petitioner.

It is also prayed that the respondents No
6 and 7 may kindly be directed to take lawful
action

against

the

delinquents

as

per

applications of the petitioner.

Petitioner
Through
Mrs. Tayyab Ramzan Chaudhary
Advocate
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.C No. PL.H-10455

Muhammad Ramzan
Chaudhary
Senior Advocate
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.C No. PL.H-1479

Sami-ul-Zamir Durrani
Advocate High Court
C.C No. PLH-1945

Faisal Mahboob Malik

Advocate HighCourt
C.C No. P-LH-36655

CERTIFICATE:
It is certified that as per instructions of the
client this is the first petition on the
subject being filed in this Honble Court.
ADVOCATE

IN THE

LAHROE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

W.P No. _________/2016

Taimur Hussain
Versus
Faisalabad Development Authority etc.
WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 199 OF THE
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN 1973
AFFIDAVIT OF
Taimur Hussain son of Fiaz Mohi-ud-Din,
resident of Main Bazar, House No. 591,
Mohallah Sarfraz Colony Faisalabad.
I

the

above

named

deponent

do

hereby

solemnly affirm and declare on oath that the

contents of accompanying writ petition are true
and

correct

to

the

best

of

my

knowledge

and

belief and nothing has been concealed therein.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified on oath at Lahore on this ____ day
of October 2016 that the contents of said
affidavit are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and nothing has been concealed
therein.
DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

C.M NO.

/2016

IN
W.P NO__________________/2016
Taimur Hussain
Versus
Faisalabad Development Authority etc.
PETITION UNDER SECTION 151 OF C.P.C. FOR THE
GRANT OF INTERIM RELIEF
Respectfully Sheweth:1.

That the captioned writ petition has been

filed in this Honourable Court today in
which no date of hearing has been fixed so
far.

2.

That the petitioner having a good prima

facie case and there is every likelihood of
its deciding in his favour.

3.

That the balance of convenience lies in

favour of the petitioner.

4.

That the contents of main writ petition may

very kindly be read as an integral part of
this petition.

5.

That under the garb of letter No. 70-PA-DIRDP-II/FDA/2016

dated

28.07.2016

the

respondents are bent upon to change the

nature of the plot No. 19/40 into a public
park, so if they are not restrained from
their

illegal

and

nefarious

designs

the

petitioners shall suffer an irreparable loss

and injury.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that
during the pendency of main writ petition,
operation of the letter NO. 70-PA-DIR-DPII/FDA/2016 dated 28.07.2016 may kindly be
suspended to the extent of the petitioners
plot NO. 19/40 and the respondents may
kindly be restrained from taking coercieve
and adverse action against the petitioner by
changing the nature of the plot No. 19/40
Petitioner
Through
Mrs. Tayyab Ramzan Chaudhary
Advocate
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.C No. PL.H-10455

Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhary

Senior Advocate
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.C No. PL.H-1479

Sami-ul-Zamir Durrani
Advocate High Court
C.C No. PLH-1945

Faisal Mahboob Malik

Advocate HighCourt
C.C No. P-LH-36655

Raheela Munawar
Advocate High Court
C.C No. P-VR-48093
Sohal Law Chambers, 7-Turner, Road, Lahore.

IN THE LAHROE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

C.M.No ________2016
IN
W.P No. _________/2016
Taimur Hussain
Versus
Faisalabad Development Authority etc.
PETITION UNDER SECTION 151 OF C.P.C. FOR THE
GRANT OF INTERIM RELIEF
AFFIDAVIT OF
Taimur Hussain son of Fiaz Mohi-ud-Din,
resident of Main Bazar, House No. 591,
Mohallah Sarfraz Colony Faisalabad.
I the above named deponent do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare on oath as
under:Respectfully Sheweth:1.

That the captioned writ petition has been

filed in this Honourable Court today in
which no date of hearing has been fixed so
far.

2.

That the petitioner having a good prima

facie case and there is every likelihood of
its deciding in his favour.

3.

That the balance of convenience lies in

favour of the petitioner.

4.

That the contents of main writ petition may

very kindly be read as an integral part of
this petition.

5.

That on the basis of letter No. 70-PA-DIRDP-II/FDA/2016

dated

28.07.2016

the

respondents are bent upon to change the

nature of the plot No. 19/40 into a public
park, so if they are not restrained from
their

illegal

and

nefarious

designs

by

changing the nature of the subject plot, the

petitioners shall suffer an irreparable loss
and injury.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified on oath at Lahore on this ____ day of
October
2016
that
the
contents
of
said
affidavit are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and nothing has been concealed
therein.
DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

C.M No.

/2016

In
W.P No. _________/2016
Taimur Hussain
Versus
Faisalabad Development Authority etc.
.
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC FOR
DISPENSING WITH PRODUCTION OF CERTIFIED
COPIES OF CERTAIN ANNEXURES
Respectfully Sheweth,
1.

That the petitioner has filed the above titled writ

petition in this Hon'ble Court today and no next
date of hearing has been fixed so far.

2.

That the titled Writ Petition is being filed in this

Hon'ble Court without certified copies of certain
annexures.

3.

That the petitioner undertakes to file the

certified copies of the certain annexures in this
Hon'ble Court, as soon as the same are made
available to him.

PRAYER

In view of the above, it is respectfully prayed

that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dispense
with production of certified copies of certain
annexures in the interest of justice and equity.

Petitioner

Through
Muhammad Ramzan Ch.
Senior Advocate
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.C No. PL.H-1479
Sohal Law Chambers,
7-Turner, Road, Lahore.

IN THE LAHROE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

C.M No.

/2016

In
W.P No. _________/2016
Taimur Hussain
Versus
Faisalabad Development Authority etc.
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC FOR
DISPENSING WITH PRODUCTION OF CERTIFIED
COPIES OF CERTAIN ANNEXURES
AFFIDAVIT OF
Taimur Hussain son of Fiaz Mohi-ud-Din,
resident of Main Bazar, House No. 591,
Mohallah Sarfraz Colony Faisalabad.
I the above named deponent do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare on oath that the
contents of accompanying application are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief and nothing has been concealed therein.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified on oath at Lahore on this ____ day of
October
2016
that
the
contents
of
said
affidavit are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and nothing has been concealed
therein.
DEPONENT

IN THE

LAHROE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

W.P No. _________/2016

Taimur Hussain
Versus
Faisalabad Development Authority etc.

INDEX
Sr

Description

1.

Writ Petition with

affidavit
Record of Rights of
Liaqat Hayyat
Record of Rghts of
Petitioner
Copies of Tatimas and
super imposed plans
Copy of application to
the Faisalabad
Development Authority
Copy of letter No
153/TPll/FDA dated
10.06.2016
Copy of report of
revenue field staff
dated 20.06.2016
Copy of application to
SHO dated 13.10.2016
Copy of letter No
70/PA/Dir/TPll/FDA-16
DATED 28.07.2016
Copies of press
clipping, snaps etc.
Copy of application to
for criminal
proceedings
Copy of judgement and
decree dated

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
7.
8.
9
10
11
.

Anne Date
x
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J

Page

11
12
13

13.12.2012
Application for
dispensation with
affidavit
Application for stay
with affidavit
Power of Attorney

Through

Petitioner

Mrs. Tayyab Ramzan Chaudhary

Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhary
Advocate
Senior Advocate
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.C No. PL.H-10455
C.C No. PL.H-1479
Sohal Law Chambers,
7-Turner, Road, Lahore.