Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Revision No. 309 of 1958‑59, decided on 14th January 1960.
, para. 7‑Gifts of land on ariatan' basis‑Mutations sanctioned long before promulgation of Martial Law‑Donees, although holding restricted rights, entered as proprietors, paying' land revenue and other Government dues‑Donor absolved from payment of agricultural income‑tax in respect of land in dispute‑No likelihood of donor's exercising option of withdrawing gifts from donees‑Gifts ordered to be validated.
This order is in continuation of the interim order passed by my predecessor dated 12th October 1959, and will dispose of the following six revisions:‑---
(1) Bibi Sarwar Sultan v. State (Revision No. 309).
(2) Bibi Attia Sultan v. State (Revision No. 310).
(3) Bibi Ibrar Sultan v. State (Revision No. 311).
(4) Bibi Shazadi v. State (Revision No. 312).
(5) Malik Ata Muhammad v State (Revision No. 313).
(6) Bibi Sahib Sultan v. State (Revision No. 334).
The facts are that Sardar Muhammad Nawaz Khan of Kot Fateh Khan gifted certain areas to the petitioners on Ariatan' basis for which the mutations were sanctioned long before the promulgation of the Martial Law. The petitioners submitted their respective declaration forms before Deputy Land Commis sioner, Attock, who vide his orders, dated 2nd July 1959, held that the petitioners had restricted rights because they could not transfer, mortgage of gift the areas in question and could only enjoy usufruct as long as the donor permitted it. In view of this, the Deputy Land Commissioner did not validate these gifts and directed that the area in dispute be considered as the ownership of the donor and resumed in favour of the Government.
2. The petitioners preferred their respective appeals against these orders before the Land Commissioner, Peshawar, who vide his orders dated 2nd September 1959, upheld the decision of the Deputy Land Commissioner. Against this order of the Land Commissioner, Peshawar, the present six revision petitions have been lodged before me.
3. Since the mutations of "Ariatan" sanctioned in favour of the petitioners conferred only temporary rights on them, my predecessor referred this case to the Land Commission. The case has now been received back for decision. I have gone through the, record of the case. Accordingly I feel that apart from the fact that all these mutations were sanctioned long before the imposition of the Martial Law, they should be validated on the following grounds :‑
(i) The donees are being shown as proprietors in the Revenue Records and are paying land revenue and other Government dues, since then.
(ii) The Financial Commissioner absolved the donor from the payment of Agricultural Income‑tax for the land in dispute.
(iii) Evidently, the donor is not likely to exercise his option of withdrawing these gifts from the petitioners, especially when he has kept for himself the maximum ceiling under the Martial Law Regulation No. 64.
In view of the above observations, I accept all these revision petitions and direct that the gifts in question should be validated. The holdings of the donees would, however, be subject to the limits laid down by the Martial Law Regulation No. 64, on individual holdings. The petitioners should be informed accordingly.
S. Q. Petitions accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer