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.
Writ Petition No. 568-R of 1976, heard on 28th April, 1985.
---Ss. 10 & 11--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--Mukhbari application--Non-appearance of petitioner--Counsel for petitioner expired--Petitioner did not make any response to notice of appearance sent twice to her--Affidavit filed alongwith petition proved to be filed by other Mukhbar to whom allotment of land was ordered to be made- Non-compliance of notices, of petitioner, held, was due to the reason that allotment was made to her attorney--Petition dismissed in circumstances.
Nemo for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 28th April, 1985.
On a Mukhbari application the land was cancelled on 20-2-1976 and it was directed to be allotted to the informer. It was allotted to the petitioner on 22-3-1976 but later on the order was re-called on the ground that her name had been inserted in the Mukhbari application and that was a forgery. This is vide order dated 22-3-1976. It was directed that the land be allotted to the other Mukhbar, Dawood Khan. This was challenged by the petitioner through the afore titled Constitutional petition.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has expired. Twice notice was sent to the petitioner but no response has been made. A perusal of the affidavit filed alongwith the petition shows that it was filed by Dawood Khan. The person who had been allowed allotment in the last mentioned order dated 22-3-1976. Since the land has been ordered to be allotted to the petitioner's own attorney, that may be the reason that no response is made by the petitioner to the notices issued to her.
3. In view of the above, this petition is dismissed.
H.B.T Petition dismissed
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer