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

NOOR BIBI versus ALI MUHAMMAD909


Article 10 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Neither the detection of fact based on misinterpretation of evidence nor the submission of the form from any document of the written applicant.

1983 C L C 3135

[Lahore]

Before Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza, J

NOOR BIBI‑Petitioner

versus

ALI MUHAMMD AND OTHERS ‑Respondents

Writ Petition No. 705‑R of 1976, decided on 10th February, 1977.

Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958) ‑

‑‑S. 10‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑Finding of fact neither basing on misreading of evidence nor perverse‑petitioner submission of Form not supported from any document‑‑Petition dismissed in circumstances of case.

Sh. Abdur Rashid for Petitioner.

Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Khan for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 9th February, 1977.

JUDGMENT

The impugned order, dated 19th May, 1975 in this Constitutional petition had been passed in pursuance of the order, dated 5th December, 1973, passed in Writ Petition No. 772‑R of 1972 by Mr. Justice A. R, Sheikh (as he then was).

2. The claim of the petitioner with regard to property in dispute has been turned down on the ground that she had not filed any form for the transfer of House No. P/218, measuring about two‑marlas.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner tried his level best to assail this finding of fact but he has not been able to convince me that the aforesaid finding was either perverse or based on misreading o evidence.

In his effort to establish that the petitioner had submitted the requisite form, learned counsel drew my attention to Annexure C' copy of a record attested by an Oath Commissioner, Lyalipur. He produced the original, but the number given on the original receipt was 1818' instead '218'. When this was pointed out to the learned counsel, he submitted that appears to be "an error of pen".

4. After considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, 1 think there is no merit in this petition. The matte stands concluded by a finding of fact, The petition is accordingly dis missed with no order as to cots.

M. A, K. Petition dismissed.

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
law websites from Hub Inds Estate 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.