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. 80 of 1968, decided on 25th June 1968.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 16th November 1967, in Writ Petition No. 2954/11 of 1962).
----Sched. Parts I & II‑High Court in writ jurisdic tion while dealing with transfer of property whether had correctly applied principles laid down in P L D 1964 S C 829‑Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider question.
A. R. Shaukat, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Abdul Karim, Attorney on behalf of Kh. Wali Muhammad, Senior Attorney on record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 25th June 1968.
The subject‑matter of dispute in this petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore is property No. S‑11‑10‑S‑3 comprising a residential building, a shop and servant quarters.
Mr. Karam Dad Khan, Settlement Inspector submitted a report to Mr. Muhammad Ajmal Khan, Assistant Settlement Commissioner with powers of Deputy Settlement Commissioner that the entire property be transferred to two sets of claimant occupants namely, Maulvi Umar Din (now deceased), the predecessors of petitioners 1 to 4 and petitioners 5 and 6 sons of late Haji Muhammad Sharif. The Assistant Settlement Com missioner passed a two‑word order saying "I agree". Later on a fresh report was submitted with regard to the servant quarters but they are not the subject of dispute in this case. This order was challenged in three appeals by three different parties. The order was modified by the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner and a portion of the residential building was transferred to Muhammad Hanif, one of the appellant before him. Umar Din filed a revision petition against the order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner which was dismissed. A second revision petition was filed jointly by Umar Din and Abdul Sattar and Inamul Huq. Muhammad Hanif also filed a revision petition. These revision petitions were dismissed by the Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner with the powers of the Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner. Two revision petitions were filed by Mian Sundar Ali which were also dismissed. He then filed two second revision petitions. One of them relating to the shop was dismissed but the one relating to the residential portion was allowed and the same was transferred to him.
Against the order of the Chief Settlement Commissioner Maulvi Umar Din and his two co‑transferees filed a writ petition in which they challenged the transfers to Mian Sundar Ali and Muhammad Hanif. Mian Sundar Ali and Muhammad Hanif also filed two petitions as they were not satisfied with the order of the Settlement authorities. All these petitions have been disposed of by one order. The learned Judges in the High Court have held on the authority of the decision of this Court in the case of Ghulam Mohiuddin v. Chief Settlement Commis sioner and others (P L D 1964 S C 829) that the initial order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner was passed without lawful authority as he did not apply his mind to the facts of the case. After setting aside the orders under challenge the case has been remanded to the Settlement Commissioner, Lahore for deciding the transfer of the property according to law after hearing the parties concerned.
Leave is granted to consider whether the view taken by the High Court is correct and it has correctly applied the principle laid down in the decision of this Court to the facts of the A present case.
Proceedings before the Settlement Authorities shall remain stayed pending the hearing of the appeal.
Security in the sum of Rs. 1,000.
Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer