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.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 174 of 1968, decided on 26th June 1968.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 21st March 1968, in Writ Petition No. 735‑R of 1967).
---
- Allotment of land obtained on basis of forged documents‑Held rightly cancelled‑Special Leave to Appeal refused by Supreme Court.
Mian Mahmud Ali Kasuri, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mushtaq Ahmad Khawaja, Senior Attorney for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Attorney Supreme Court for Respondent No. 4.
Date of hearing : 26th June 1968.
.‑The Settlement and Rehabilita tion authorities cancelled the allotment of certain urban land in Shahdara and Bhekewal in the name of the petitioner No. 1 and his deceased wife Mst. Rakhi on the finding that their total entitlement for agricultural land has been earlier satisfied in Chak No. 65‑A/GD, District Sahiwal in 1953 and that the allotment of the land in question was on the basis of forged documents obtained fraudulently by one Mehraj Din in their names. The High Court having declined to interfere with the orders of the Settlement authorities in writ jurisdiction the petitioners with the two sons of Mst. Rakhi deceased seek special leave to appeal.
On perusing the record we are left in no doubt that the allotment of the urban land was obtained by Mehraj Din fraudu lently in the names of the petitioner and his wife Mst. Rakhi and same was rightly cancelled.
The application for verification of urban land abandoned by the petitioner and his wife was admittedly made by Mehraj Din and it was he who put his thumb‑impressions on it in place of the thumb‑impressions of the petitioner and Mst. Rakhi. Similarly he falsely swore the affidavit accompanying the application. Further as the total entitlement of the petitioner and his wife had been earlier satisfied in Chak No. 65 in 1953 neither of them had the right to apply for verification of urban land. The representatives of the Department who appeared as witnesses deposed that the petitioner and his wife had no entitlement for land and that forged documents were used by Mehraj Din in obtaining allotment of the land in dispute.
The conclusion reached by the Settlement authorities that Mehraj Din had fraudulently obtained allotment of land in dispute in the name of the petitioner and his wife on the basis of forged documents was thus unexceptionable and the High Court was fully justified in declining to interfere with the impugned orders.
The petition for leave to appeal is dismissed.
Leave refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer