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. 194 of 1967, decided on 6th October 1967.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 13th April 1967, in Letters Patent Appeal No. 305 of 1964).
---Act (XXVIII of 1958), Sched, Part, I‑Divisibility of house‑Successor in‑office of Chief Settlement Commissioner whether not competent to interpret and clarify order of his predecessor‑Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider question.
Gul Muhammad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Tanvir Ahmad, Attorney for Petitioner.
Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Shamim Ahmad Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Mushtaq Ahmad, Attorney for Respondent No. 2.
Nemo for Respondent No. 1.
Date of hearing : 6th October 1967.
The dispute in this case is over demarca tion of property No. 105, Ferozepur Road, Lahore.
Final Authority in the Settlement Department, i.e. Mr Pir Ahsanuddin, the Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner, after spot inspection held that the house is clearly divisible and can be comfortably occupied by two independent families without causing any real interference with the privacy of each other'. He further directed that Ch. Bahar Muhammad shall be allowed to have the first floor as well'. ,
As there was dispute over demarcation of the property, Mr. M. H. Sufi, successor of Mr. Ahsanudd in, passed the following order :‑
"The first floor has two rooms and an open space in front. Mr. Zuhair Siddiqi (the petitioner) contends that the intention of the Chief Settlement Commissioner (Pir Ahsanud‑Din) was that Ch. Bahar Muhammad should get the two rooms in the first floor but the open space was to be divided between him (Ch. Bahar Muhammad) and the petitioner. After personal inspection of the site, I am convinced that Ch. Bahar s Muhammad cannot use the two rooms on the first floor if the open space in front is divided between the' two parties. I, therefore, hold that the words first floor' used in my predecessor's order include the built portion as well as the open space which should go to Ch. Bahar Muhammad."
Zuhair Siddiqi then moved a writ against the above order. The learned Single Judge being of the opinion that the finding of the Chief Settlement Commissioner was final and conclusive, dismissed the writ petition.
On appeal, the Letters Patent Bench held that Mr. Sufi in interpreting the order of his predecessor acted in excess of his authority and it therefore declared his order to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect'. Special leave to appeal is sought against the above order.
It was contended that Mr. Sufi was quite competent to interpret and to clarify the order of his predecessor and as sue the Letters Patent Bench acted beyond its jurisdiction in interfering with his order.
In our opinion, the above contention is not entirely without substance. We accordingly grant leave to appeal as prayed. Security‑Rs. 1,000.
The petitioner is permitted to carry out necessary repairs to the first floor which is in his possession.
Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer