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 No. 179‑R of 1979, decided on 27th October, 1979.
(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 12‑6‑1979 of the Lahore High Court at Lahore in Writ Petition No. 611‑R of 1979).
Evidence Act (I of 1872)‑
‑‑ S. 115‑Laches‑Estoppel‑‑Petitioner sleeping over matter for long periods of time and respondent obtaining valuable rights and interest in property‑Assertion that petitioner in fact remained unaware of proceedings of Settlement authorities for nearly two decades, not supported by circumstances nor logical‑Refusal of High Court to exercise discretion in favour of petitioner, held. un exceptionable‑Petitioner, held further, not entitled to relief on account of both ]aches and estoppel, in circumstances. ‑[Laches Estoppel].
Abdul Majid Shaida v. Mst. Noor Jehan and another P L D 1967 S C 221 ref.
Samad Mahmood, Advocate Supreme Court and Imtiaz Mohammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 27th October, 1979.
J.‑This petition for leave to appeal calls in question the order dated 12th June, 1979 passed by the Lahore High Court, dismissing a writ petition, wherein the question of transfer of a property under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958 was raised.
The petitioner is a local. He filed an L H transfer form which was rejected by an Assistant Settlement Commissioner on 13th December, 1959. The property was auctioned in favour of respondent No. 1 who surrendered it to respondent No. 2, is whose favour a P. T. D. was issued in 1971.
The petitioner's case was that despite his efforts in this behalf, no information was given to him about the processing on his form, nor was he made aware of proceedings in favour of the respondents: He submitted several applications in this behalf to the concerned authority but without any success. Ultimately, he filed the writ petition in June 1979 which was dismissed in limine by a learned Single Judge on ground mainly of "sheer negligence and indifference" on the part of the petitioner.
Learned counsel states that the first application by the petitioner to seek information/relief, after the submission of LH form in 1959, was made on 4th June 1964 and that till October 1969 he moved some more applications. Then after lapse of nearly seven years petitioner moved another application in 1976. In the meanwhile P. T. D. was issued to respondent No. 2 in 1972.
After hearing the learned counsel, on the question of the conduct o the petitioner, we are of the view that in the circumstances of this case, the petitioner would not b: entitled to any relief on account of both laches and estoppel. He slept over the matter for long periods of time, during which the respondents obtained valuable rights and interest in the property. This case is covered by the rule laid down by this Court in Abdul Majid Shaida v. Mst. Noor Jehan and another (P L D 1967 S C 221) as affirmed in Civil Review Peti tion No. K‑3 of 1967. Th.‑ assertion of the petitioner that in fact he remained unaware of the proceedings of the Settlement authorities for nearly two decades is also without the support of circumstances, nor is it logical. Refusal of the High Court to exercise discretion in his favour is unexceptionable. This petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer