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. 247 of 1979, decided on 10th November, 1981.
(On appeal. from the judgment dated 14‑1‑1979 of the Lahore High Court. Lahore in Writ Petition 1119‑R/1970).
---Art. 185 (3)‑Remand (civil)‑Leave to appeal‑Matter requiring further examination, order of remand to competent officer passed by High Court, held, justified‑High Court, however, while remanding case for decision afresh making certain strong observations conceivably influencing competent officer while deciding matter afresh such observa tions, held further, to be treated as tentative observations and officer concerned to decide matter uninfluenced by such observations purely on merits of case in light of contentions advanced.
Zaki‑ud‑Din Pal, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Ahmed Khan, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Petitioner.
Dilawar Mahmood, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and M. A. Qadri, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Respondents.
Date of hearing :10th November, 1981.
‑This petition is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dated 14‑1‑1979, whereby the writ petition (W. P. No, 1119‑R/70), filed by Respondent No. 1 herein, was accepted and the judgment of the Settlement Commissioner elated 9‑7‑1970 was declared to be without lawful and the Chief Settlement Commissioner directed to entrust the case to a competent officer to decide it afresh according to law. We have heard Mr. Zaki‑ud‑Din Pal, in support of this petition, as well as Mr. Dilawar Mahmood on behalf of Respondent No. 1, examined the documents filed by them in support of their respective contentions and care fully perused the judgment of the High Court and have come to the conclu sion that the matter did require further examination and the order of remand to the competent officer to decide it afresh according to law was justified and is not open to any objection.
We, however, find that while remanding the case for decision afresh, the learned Judge in the High Court has made certain strong observations, which could conceivably influence the competent officer while deciding this matter afresh. We would clarify that the observations made in the judgment of the High Court must be treated in the nature of tentative observations and the officer dealing with the matter in remand will proceed to decide it uninfluenced by the said observations purely on the merits of the case in the light of the contentions advanced before him on the basis of material adduced in support thereof.
The petition; subject to the above observations stands 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