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. 89 of 1982, decided on 19th February, 1984.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 26‑10‑1981 of the Lahore High Court Lahore in L.P.A. No. 480 of 1966).
‑‑‑Art. 1135(3)‑‑Question raised in petition one of law not decided by Supreme Court so far‑‑‑Leave to appeal granted.
Mst. Madina Begum v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner and others P L D 1968 Lah. 945 ref.
Maqbool Ilahi Malik, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 19th February, 1984.
The relevant facts are that the petitioner, alongwith her husband Ali Muhammad, was in occupation of House No.E/97, Dhall Mohallah, Mochi Gate, Lahore. One Ilam Din was in possession of House No. G/462 which is the house in dispute, in the present proceedings. In May, 1959, the Deputy Rehabilitation Commis sioner allowed the exchange of the above referred house at the request of Ali Muhammad and Illam Din. In fact, both the parties actually interchanged the possession with the approval and sanction of the Deputy Rehabilitation Commissioner.
The petitioner thereafter submitted a C.H. form for the transfer of the house in dispute claiming that she. was entitled to be considered in possession of the house in dispute on the strength of the possession of her husband of House No.E/97, Uhali Mohallah, Mochi Gate. This plea was neither accepted by the Settlement authorities nor by the High Court who considered that the petitioner having occupied the house in dispute after the crucial date, namely, 20‑12‑‑1958 was not entitled to be considered for transfer of the said house.
Mr. Maqbool Ilahi Malik, learned counsel for the petitioner, it" support of this petition for leave to appeal, has relied upon the judgment of a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court reported as Mst. Madina Begum v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner and others P L D 1968 Lah. 945 wherein in somewhat similar circumstances a house allotted to the one party was exchanged for another house with the approval of the competent Rehabilitation Authority the allotment of such person for purposes of transfer of the house in dispute was deemed to have been made when he was initially allotted the previous house.
The question raised is one of law and does not appear to have been decided by this Court so far. We would, accordingly, grant leave to appeal to consider it.
Security for costs of the respondents shall be furnished in the sum of Rs. 2,500.
The appeal shall be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to add further documents, if any and put up for hearing as early as possible.
Status quo as regards possession shall be maintained.
M.Z.M. Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer