You are on page 1of 10

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

C.R. No. ___________/2003

Muhammad Saleem S/o Noor Muhammad, caste Sheikh,


R/o Al-Ghana Guest House, Chowk Kumharanwala, Multan.
……PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Water & Sanitatation Agency, Bagh Langay Khan, Multan,
through its Managing Director.
2. Assistant Director (Revenue), WASA, WASA House, 316/A,
Shams Abad, Multan.
..…RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT

Revision Petition U/s 115 C.P.C. against


the judgment dated 19.12.2002 passed
by Mr. Bahadur Ali Khan, the learned
Additional District Judge, Multan, by
which the appeal against order dated
12.12.02 passed by Mr. Muhammad
Amir Munir, Civil Judge, Multan for
issuance of injunction till final decision
of the case was dismissed in limine.

Claim in Revision: -
To set aside the impugned judgment
dated 19.12.02 & order dated 12.12.02
and to grant temporary injunction to
restore the flow of sanitation connection
till the final decision of suit by
accepting this petition.
Respectfully Sheweth: -

1. That the names and addresses of the parties have correctly


been given for the purpose of their summons and citations.

2. That the brief facts giving rise to this petition are that the
petitioner has obtained a connection for sanitation purpose
from respondents under A/c No. 015-B/01174A. The
petitioner paid the bills issued by the respondents regularly
and there was no default till the month of 05/2002, on the part
of the petitioner. Copies of paid bills are ANNEX “A to A/3.”

3. That the bill for 06/02 was issued by the respondents wherein
Rs. 11,022/- was included as arrears. The petitioner brought
the matter to the notice of respondent No. 2 and showed him
the copy of last paid bill for 05/02 and requested for
correction of bill or supply the details of arrear to justify the
claim, but the respondent No. 2 did not supply details of
arrears or justified the arrears inspite of the repeated visits of
petitioner to his office from time to time for about three
months. However, no bill of sanitation was issued by the
respondents till 09/02. Copy of bill for 06/02 is ANNEX “B”.

4. That a bill for 10/02 was received from WASA amounting to


Rs. 63,900/- @ monthly rate of Rs. 1725/- per month
including Rs. 62,174/- as arrears. The petitioner rushed to the
office of respondent No. 2 and requested him to look into the
matter personally to correct the bills according to the
approved rates or justify the arrears so that the payment is
made, but another bill amounting to Rs. 41,250/- was issued in
the same month of 10/02 for the same period, wherein
Rs. 40,093/- were included as arrears with monthly rate of
Rs. 1150/-. Copy of both the bills are ANNEX “C & D”.

5. That the petitioner stressed upon the respondent No. 2 to


revise the bill as per rules, but he ordered to pay the 2nd bill of
Rs. 41,370/- in four installments, which he himself allowed
without any request by petitioner.

6. That on 28.11.2002, the respondents disconnected the


connection without serving any prior notice; and they are not
ready to correct the wrong and unjustified bill. As per
notification dated 23.9.92, the sewerage fee for “B” Class
Hotel is Rs. 300/- per month and for “A” Class Hotel is Rs.
500/- per month. The arrears for four months (6/02 to 9/02)
cannot exceed Rs. 2000/- even if the rate of “A” Class Hotel
i.e. Rs. 500/- per month is applied, whereas the respondents
have demanded Rs. 40,093/- as arrears in the bill for the
month of 10/02. Finding no other way, the petitioner was
compelled to seek remedy from the court of law. The
petitioner filed a suit in the court of learned Senior Civil
Judge, Multan on 4.12.2002 and the same was entrusted for
further hearing, to the court of Mr. Muhammad Amir Muneer,
the learned Civil Judge, Multan on the same day. Copy of
notification with better copy of plaint & application for
temporary injunction are ANNEX “E, E/1 F & G”.

7. That notice was issued to respondents and counsel for


respondent appeared before the court on 12.12.2002. The
petitioner put up his plea in detail that there was prima facie a
fit case as the respondents were not clear themselves to justify
the claim, the balance of convenience was also leaning in
favour of petitioner and irreparable loss being sustained by
plaintiff/petitioner. The respondent’s counsel just stated that
there is no mistake in the bill for the month of October, 2002.
It is specially pointed out that parawise reply/written
statement was not submitted by the respondents’ counsel.

8. That on 12.12.02, the learned court after considering the


arguments of both the parties, dismissed the application for
grant of injunction till the final disposal of the case. Copy of
order is ANNEX “H”.

9. That petitioner/plaintiff feeling aggrieved by the order dated


12.12.02, filed an appeal and the learned appellate court was
pleased to dismiss the appeal vide judgment dated 19.12.02.
Copy of appeal and judgment is ANNEX “I & J”.
10. That the judgment dated 19.12.02 passed by the learned
appellate court and the order dated 12.12.02 passed by the
learned trial court are impugned inter-alia on the following:

GROUNDS

i) That the impugned judgment and order are against the


natural justice and principles of equity.

ii) That the impugned judgment and order are against the
prevailing law and justice.

iii) That the impugned judgment and order of both courts


are arbitrary, perverse and against the facts of the case.

iv) That both the learned courts could not assess the
essence of pleadings and documents on record.

v) That both the learned courts could not properly


ascertain the legal rights of the petitioner.

vi) That the learned appellate court decided the matter in


haste and decided the matter without considering the
merits of case.

vii) That the learned appellate court was not vigilant while
considering the notification dated 23.9.92 and decided
the case on the basis of pick & choose.

viii) That the learned appellate court ignored the facts of the
case and pronounced the judgment on the wrong
perception.

ix) That the judgment of the learned appellate court caused


a great miscarriage of justice to the petitioner.

In view of the above submissions, it is


respectfully prayed that the revision petition in
hand may please be accepted and judgment dated
19.12.02 passed by the learned appellate court
and order dated 12.12.02 passed by the learned
trial court may please be set aside.
Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court
deems fit and proper, may graciously be awarded
in the interest of justice & equity.

Humble Petitioner,

Dated: __________

Through: -

Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Nadeem, Sh. Muhammad Faheem,


Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan. 28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176

Certificate: -

Certified as per instructions of the


client, this is the first revision petition
on the subject matter. No such petition
has earlier been filed before this
August Court.

Advocate
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. ____________/2003


In
C.R. No.___________/2003

Muhammad Saleem Vs. WASA, etc.

APPLICATION FOR DISPENSING WITH THE


FILING OF CERTIFIED COPIES OF ANNEXURES.
=========================================

Respectfully Sheweth: -
1. That the above-titled application is being filed before this
Hon’ble Court, the contents of which should be considered as
part & parcel of the main revision petition.

2. That certified copies of Annexes “ ” are not readily


available. However, uncertified/photo state copies of the same
have been annexed with the petition, which are true copies of
the original documents.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this


Hon’ble court may please dispense with the filing of
aforesaid copies of documents.
APPLICANT,
Dated: __________

Through: -

Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Nadeem, Sh. Muhammad Faheem,


Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan. 28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

C.R. No.___________/2003

Muhammad Saleem Vs. WASA, etc.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Muhammad Saleem S/o Noor Muhammad, caste
Sheikh, R/o Al-Ghana Guest House, Chowk
Kumharanwala, Multan.

I, the above named deponent do hereby


solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-titled C.R. are true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has
been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
of January 2003 that the contents of this affidavit
are true & correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.

DEPONENT
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. ____________/2003


In
C.R. No.___________/2003

Muhammad Saleem Vs. WASA, etc.

APPLICATION U/S 151 C.P.C. FOR INTERIM RELIEF.

Respectfully Sheweth: -

1. That the contents of Civil Revision may please be treated as


part & parcel f this application.

2. That the impugned order and judgment are against the natural
justice & law of equity.

3. That the impugned order and judgment are against the


prevailing law of justice.

4. That the order and judgment of learned courts are arbitrary


and perverse.

5. That both the learned courts could not properly ascertain the
legal rights of this petitioner.

6. That the learned courts ignored the facts of the case and
pronounced the judgment on the wrong perceptions.

7. That the illegal act of the respondents for recovery of


unjustified and an-ascertained arrears will amount to be a
double rather many time more wrong payment, besides
causing irreparable loss towards good-will and consequent
mental and physical torture to petitioner and his family.

8. That the applicant has prima facie a strong and arguable case
in his favour.

9. That balance of convenience also leans in favour of applicant.

In view of the above humble submissions,


it is respectfully prayed that the operation of
order passed by the learned trial court dated
12.12.02 and judgment of learned appellate court
dated 19.12.02 may please be suspended till the
disposal of the revision petition.

Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court


deems fit and proper, may graciously be awarded
in the interest of justice & equity.

Humble Applicant,

Dated: __________

Through: -

Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Nadeem, Sh. Muhammad Faheem,


Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan. 28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

C.R. No.___________/2003

Muhammad Saleem Vs. WASA, etc.

INDEX
S. No. DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS ANNEXES PAGES
1 Urgent Form
2 Opening Sheet
3 Civil Revision.
4 Affidavit
5 Copies of paid bills. A to A/3
6 Copy of bill for 06/02. B
7 Copy of bills. C&D
8 Copy of notification with better copy E, E/1, F, G
of plaint & application.
9 Copy of order. H
10 Copy of appeal & judgment. I&J
11 Dispensation Application.
12 Affidavit.
13 Stay application.
14 Affidavit.
15 Power of attorney.

PETITIONER,
Dated: __________

Through: -

Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Nadeem, Sh. Muhammad Faheem,


Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan. 28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176