Lahore High Court sets out rules for disputes over joint property rights

The Lahore High Court (LHC) has ruled that a co-owner of joint property cannot unilaterally change the nature or use of the property and that a legal claim for an injunction may be brought against an attempt to do so.

According to the 24NewsHD TV channel, the ruling was issued in a case concerning a dispute over jointly owned property, in which the court considered a request for an injunction against an attempt to create a passage through the disputed property.

The court held that an injunction application in such circumstances is maintainable, but said the claimant must provide evidence of an act that could cause damage to or otherwise affect the joint property.

The court observed that simply being a co-owner does not give a person exclusive ownership rights over a particular portion of jointly owned property. Anyone seeking exclusive rights over a specific part must follow the legal process for partition of the property.

The court also ruled that a statement or finding from an earlier case cannot automatically be relied upon in a later case. Before using a previous statement, the connection between the facts of the earlier and current cases must be established.

The record of the earlier case had been produced through a statement by the petitioner’s lawyer. However, the record did not establish the identity or location of the disputed passage.

The court held that a decision made without establishing the foundation of the evidence can be corrected in its revisional jurisdiction. It further stressed that, before an injunction is granted against a co-owner, the basis of the allegation must be proved.

The Lahore High Court consequently set aside the decisions and decrees issued by the lower courts and sent the case back to the trial court for a fresh decision.

The High Court directed the relevant parties to be given an opportunity to produce the record relating to the disputed passage and the earlier case before the matter is decided again.

A single-member bench issued the six-page judicial precedent while hearing a petition filed by Muhammad Ishtiaq and others.