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. 142 of 1979, decided on 4th March, 1981.
(On appeal from the judgment _ and order- off. the Lahore High Court, dated 10-1-1979 in W. P. 25-R/79).
-- Art. 185(3)---Leave to appeal-No omission or misreading of evidence on disputed factual finding of Court below pointed out Petitioner's claim not supported by any revenue record-Agreement relied upon by petitioner rightly rejected by all Courts below for very solid reasons and such orders not suffering front any legal or factual infirmity Petition for leave to appeal dismissed.
Muhammad Yaqoob Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Z. Khalil, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 4th March, 1981.
The case of the petitioners is that Ghaus Bakhsh fattier of petitioner No. 1, and grandfather of petitioners 2 to 10 had obtained the land in dispute on Adhalapi tenure from is erstwhile evacuee owners on 6-3-1915, according to which he was required to sink a well and deep the land, and as when the gradual development progress he was to become owner of one half of the land developed from time to time. For claiming this declaration on 10-3-1976, the petitioners filed an application before the learned Deputy Custodian of Evacuee Property but without any success as it was dismissed on 13-3-1976. ' They filed an appeal which was also dismissed by the Custodian on 24-10-1978. At that stage they filed a constitutional petition being Writ Petition 25-R/79 which also met the same fate and was dismissed by the High Court on 10-1-1979. They have now come up in a petition for leave to appeal to this Court.
2. Learned counsel repeated his aforesaid claim before us, but we must say that he was unable to point out any omission or misreading of evidence on the aforesaid factual finding involved in this case. The claim of the petitioners is not supported from any revenue record. Sole reliance of the petitioners was on the agreement dated 6-3-1915 but it is to be noticed that it has rightly been rejected by all the Courts below for very valid reasons contained in their judgments which do not suffer from any legal or factual infirmity.
3. The result is that this petition no merit and is dismissed hereby in limine.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer