Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

versus


Sch, Part II The question is whether the shops are part of a factory; in fact the High Court rightly refused to interfere with the settlement authorities' order in the writ jurisdiction.

1968 S C M R 1280

Present : Fazle‑Akbar, C. J. and Sajjad Ahmad, J

Mirza MUHAMMAD YAQOOB BEG ---Petitioner

versus

THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, SARGODHA AND 4 OTHERS‑Respondents

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 247 of 1968, decided on 21st June 1968.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 19th March 1968, in Letters Patent Appeal No. 287/1966).

Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)---

--

Sch., Part II‑Question whether shops part of a factory, one of fact‑High Court, in writ jurisdiction, held, rightly refused to interfere with order of settlement authorities.

Mian Fazal‑e‑Mahmood, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Wajid Hussain, Senior Attorney for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 21st June 1968.

JUDGMENT

SAJJAD AHMAD, J.

‑The Settlement authorities have held that the disputed rooms which have been transferred to respondents Nos. 2‑5 on their C. S. Forms did not form part of the Mohar Singh Harnam Singh Soap Factory, Sargodha, which has been transferred to the petitioner as an industrial concern. The High Court has confirmed this view by dismissing the writ petition which was filed by the petitioner against the decision of the Settlement authorities.

Respondents Nos. 2‑5 who are claimants were in possession of the disputed rooms and were running shops in them as found by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner who had inspected the spot. Me soap factory and the disputed shops are situated in a commercial area. The buildings in the premises of the factory do not constitute a single unit, is evident from the fact that the petitioner had himself asked for transfer of a portion of the building as a residential unit, which has been transferred to him as such independently of the portion given to him as an industrial concern.

Whether the disputed shops form part of the factory or are independent of it, is a question of fact which has been decided by the relevant authorities against the petitioner. The High Court has found this decision to be just and we do not find any justification to reopen the case.

The petition is dismissed.

Leave refused.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
criminal advocate from Khanqah Dogran lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.