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

SULEMAN versus ROCHOMAL


Section 23 Unlawful Property Rehabilitation The land in the disputed record of income tax in the joint territories of the disputed several evacuees was declared evacuated by the custodian respondents, without first obtaining a specific custodial order from them. Is not entitled to restore the share of the share. The Act XII of section 23, 1967 directs the restoration of certain shares

1981 C L C 1219

[Karachi]

Before I. Mahmud and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ

SULEMAN (REPRESENTED BY HIS HEIRS) AND 11 OTHERS‑Appellants

versus

ROCHOMAL AND 19 OTHERS‑Respondents

Letters Patent Appeal No. 119 of 1966, decided on 15th October, 1978.

(a) Pakistan (Administration of Evacuee Property) Act (XII of 1957)‑‑

------S. 23‑Non‑evacuee property‑Restoration of possession‑Land in dispute standing in revenue record in joint khatas of several evacuees‑Respondents declared non‑evacuees by Custodian‑Respon dents held, not entitled to restoration of possession of their share of properties without first obtaining a specific order of Custodian under S. 23, Act XII of 1967 directing restoration of their specific shares.

Yousaf Ali v. Muhammad Aslam Zia and others P L D 1958 S C (Pak.) 104 distinguished.

Lachmandas v. Central Government of Pakistan and another P L D 1973 S C 379 and Mst. Hajra Sughra v. District Judge & Settlement Commissioner, Hyderdabad and others 1969 S C M R 686 fol.

(b) Pakistan Rehabilitation Act (XLII of 1956)‑---

--------S. 7(2) read with Pakistan (Administration of Evacuee Property) Act (XII of 1957), S. 23‑Partition of property‑Evacuee property consisting of a share in land‑Rehabilitation Authority may effect partition by defining share after obtaining permission of Custodian Such permission, however, held, subject to power of Custodian to order restoration under S. 23.

Khalid M. Ishaque for Appellants.

Abdul Majeed Khan for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.

Nemo for the Remaining Respondents.

Dates of hearing : 24th, 25th and 30th .April, 1978.

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
inheritance advocates near Khoski 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.