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.
Writ Petition No. 6449 of 1980, decided on 15th June, 1980.
‑‑ Ss. 10 & 32 read with Government Grants Act (XV of 1895) Lease‑Ejectment‑Conditions of lease under S. 10 of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act operate as a rule of law‑Period of lease expiring, tenant of Government land, held, has no option but to deliver its possession to authorities‑Failure to do a trespass and tenant liable to be ejected by Collector under S. 32 of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act.
‑‑ S. 10 read with Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 [M. L. R. 115] Special provisions‑Contention that Martial Law Regulation 115 overrides all other laws and that all other laws stand repealed to extent of their inconsistency with its provisions‑Held: Legislature in Colonization of Government Lands Act having directed its attention to case of a special class, presumption arises of subsequent legal instru ment, namely Martial Law Regulation 115, laying down a general principle that tenants could not be ejected except through Revenue Courts and under stipulated conditions‑General principle not to be taken as meant to rip up what Legislature had before provided in case of special class, unless, an intention to do so specially declared in Martial Law Regulation.
Muhammad Yousaf v. Province of Punjab P L D 1976 Lah. 328 and Babu Khan v. The Crown 1970 S C M R 107 ref.
---Para. 25‑Protection to tenant‑Protection envisaged to be given to tenants under para. 25 of Martial Law Regulation 115 actually directed against their landlords‑Regulation, however, held, does not apply to a Provincial Government in its capacity as a land owner.
Barker v. Edger 1898 A C 748 (754) (P C) ref.
Aslam Riaz for Petitioner.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer