22/01/2026
A partition petition was filed under Section 135 of the Land Revenue Act 1967 against legal heirs of Mst. Bibi for the partition of shares of applicant in the immovable property based on a registry which was executed by Mst. Bibi in favor of applicant in 2022. The applicant is maternal nephew of Mst. Bibi. After gaining knowledge, the respondents appeared before the Assistant Collector (AC). The respondents have also challenged the said registry in civil court, stating that the deceased was bedridden until her last breath with them. Her brothers and grand children, being her legal heirs, questioned how the registry was executed by her as Mst. Bibi was bedridden since 2021 in their house.
The civil court, after hearing arguments, granted ad-interim relief in the form of status quo to the extent of further alienation. An application for sine die adjournment was filed with the AC, praying for adjournment under Section 141 of the Land Revenue Act, as there is a title dispute between the same parties regarding the same subject matter, and an attested copy of the civil court order(temporary injunction) was placed on file.
The AC dismissed the application, stating that the partition proceedings were prior in time and other legal formalities has already been completed. The court emphasized that no extension of stay order was placed on file, hence dismissing the application. An appeal was filed before the Additional Deputy Commissioner (ADC) against the AC's order, which was argued by counsel for both parties.
The learned counsel for appellants argued that the requirements under Section 141 of the Revenue Act were met:
1. A title dispute is pending in civil court
2. Between the same parties
3. Regarding the same subject matter
4. A court order is placed on file
Despite this, the AC dismissed the application, contrary to law. Notably, in civil court, opportunities were given to defendants to submit a written statement, but they failed, leading to the right of defense being struck off, and the case was decreed in favor of the current appellants, resulting in conflicting judgments from both forums.
After hearing arguments, the impugned order of the AC was declared against the law, the partition proceedings were set-aside and the appeal was admitted.
Adv Shamsher Ali represented the appellants at all forums.
