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.
Constitutional Petition No. D-20 of 1978, decided on 10th April, 1984.
---Para. 25--Gift--Natural justice, principles of--Land gifted by father of petitioner in his favour declared invalid without notice to petitioner- Order passed, held, in violation of principles of natural justice and set aside--Case remanded for decision afresh after notice to petitioner- [Natural justice, principles of].
K . A . Wahab for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 10th April, 1984.
.--The petitioner in this petition has impugned the order dated 28-12-1976 passed by respondent No.2 invalidating the gift in his favour effected by his father respondent No.6. The brief facts leading to the filing of the above petition are that respondent No.6 had effected gift of the suit land in favour of the petitioner on 26-9-1971. After the enforcement of M.L.R. 115, respondent No.6 filed a declaration, which was scrutinized by the Land Commissioner, Sind, who by his order dated 7-8-1972 declared the above gift as valid. It seems that respondent No.2 in exercise of Suo Motu revisional power by his impugned order dated 28-12-1976 declared the above gift as in valid inter alia on the ground that since revenue receipts in the name of respondent No.6 and as it was not proved that the physical possession of the land was given to the petitioner, the gift was not valid.
2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the above impugned order has been passed without any prior notice to him. The respondent department has chosen not to contest the above petition as nobody has turned up on behalf of the respondent. There is no denial from the side of the respondents to the petitioner's averment that no notice was served on the petitioner, prior to the passing of the impugned order. In this view of the matter, there has been violation of the principle of natural justice, and, therefore, we allow the above petition and declare the impugned order as being without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The respondents are restrained from acting or enforcing the same. However, we remand the case to the Federal Land Commission with the direction to decide the matter afresh after notice to the petitioner.
M. A. K. Case remanded.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer