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

BASHIR AHMAD versus JAN MUHAMMAD


The High Court intervened in the question of the fact of the identification and limitation of the termination of property in respect of the Arts 185 (3) and 199 Homelessness (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), Section 10 related income records. Not demanded to be used in constitutional jurisdiction leave, appeal denied

1983 S C M R 1046

Present: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and M. S. H. Quraishi, JJ

BASHIR AHMAD‑‑Petitioner

versus

JAN MUHAMMAD AND OTHBRS‑Respondents

Civil Petition No. 483 of 1976, decided on 9th March, 1983.

(From the order, dated 23‑2‑1976 of the Lahore High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 227‑R of 1976).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑---

‑‑ Arts. 185(3) & 199‑Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 10‑Question of fact relating to identity and extent of property transferred concluded by reference to relevant revenue record‑High Court not called upon to interfere into question in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction‑Leave, to appeal refused.

S. M. Zamir Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 9th March, 1983.

ORDER

M. S. H. QURASHI, J.

‑Property No. 137, Block 'A', Dera Ghazi Khan, shown to have been in occupation of Abdul Ghafoor and Ali Nawaz, had been transferred by auction in favour of petitioner Bashir Ahmad on 14‑3‑1960. Property No. 136 had similarly been transferred to one Siraj‑ud‑Din and Property No. 134 to Jan Muhammad respondent. Bashir Ahmad's miscel laneous application for demarcation of his property having been rejected on 17‑1‑1970, he filed an appeal but the same was also rejected on 27‑10‑1970. Having thus failed to tag the other two properties in Property No. 137, he again applied for correction of evacuee owner's name in his P. T. D., which application was allowed by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner on 16‑5‑1975, without examining the record, and in this way he got included in his, property the properties of evacuees which had been transferred in the name of Siraj‑ud‑Din and Jan Muhammad. At the request of Jan Muhammad on 21‑7‑1975 for correction of evacuee owners' names, the matter was once again examined by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner who after scrutiny of the relevant revenue record noted that the properties bore the following particulars :‑‑‑

_______________________________________________________________________

"Taxation Khata Revenue No. Name of Evacuee Owner

No. No and

Khasra

________________________________________________________________________

136 6545 104/10271 Mst. Bbambi Bai widow of Chandan

Ram 2 shares; Mst. Sita Devi widow

of Tek Chand 1 share.

154 6546 104/10272 Mst. Jamman Bai daughter of

Jamman Ram Chubbra.

137 6547 104/10270 Laku Ram son of Sahib Ram Arrora

2 shares ; Mst. Jamna Bai widow of

Tek Chand 1 share."

Bashir Ahmad, who in response to notice appeared before the Deputy Settlement Commissioner, instead of satisfying him on the factual plane, questioned his competency to proceed in the matter after the repeal of the relevant Act. But the Deputy Settlement Commissioner held that the order of his prodecessor, dated 16‑5‑1975 allowing the correction of the evacuee owners' names in the P. T. O./P. T. D. of Bashir Ahmad was void ab initio. He, therefore, by order, dated 29‑9‑1975 set aside .the said correction and directed that "The names of Mst. Jamna Bai and Bhambi Bai and Sita Devi be deleted from the P. T. D. under intimation to him. The transfer order in respect of House No. 154 transferred to Jan Muhammad be corrected showing the name of the evacuee as Mst. Jamna Bai daughter of Juman Ram which falls in Khata No. 6546 and Khasra No. 104/ 10272". The petitioner's revision and writ petition having failed, be is now seeking leave to appeal.

2. We feel that the question involved is one of fact relating to the identity and extent of the property transferred in favour of the petitioner, which has been concluded by reference to the relevant revenue record an as such the High Court was not called upon to interfere in the exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

M. Z. M 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
immigration advocate from Talamba 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.