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. 882 of 1975, decided on 10th February, 1981.
(On petition against the judgment dated 8th July, 1975 of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No. 1814 of 1966).
-----Art. 185 (3)‑Leave to appeal‑Officer complained against not found to have committed fraud by obtaining signatures of parties on blank paper and written down their statements according to his own notions Held, nothing on record sustaining petitioner's submission, leave to appeal declined.
Chaudhri Zamir Ahmed Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of bearing : 10th February, 1981.
.‑During the consolidation proceedings the parties to this case referred the question of consolidation of their holdings to arbitra tion. The Arbitrator gave an award. The Assistant Consolidation Officer partitioned the joint property in accordance with the "compromise between the parties dated 6‑3‑1964". The petitioners filed an appeal before the Collector alleging that the thumb‑impression had been obtained on a blank paper on which incorrect statements were later recorded and the award was not implemented. The appeal was dismissed by the Collector on 24‑6‑1964 as the record did not bear out the submissions made by the petitioners. A revision petition was similarly rejected by the Additional Commissioner (Con solidations), Multan and a further revision petition met the same fate at the bands of the Member, Board of Revenue on 1‑9‑1966.
2. The only point urged before us is that the Award should have bee implemented. That such a matter cannot be referred to arbitration under the Arbitration Act, 1940 needs no gainsaying. The sheet of paper being pressed into service as an Award is, therefore, not worth the paper on which it is written. Even otherwise it is not possible for us to believe that the Assistant Consolidation Officer committed fraud by obtaining signatures of the parties on a blank paper and then wrote down their statement according to his own notions. There is nothing on the record on which the submission of the petitioner can be sustained and we find no fault with the order of the Lahore High Court. This petition is consequently 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