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

ILAM DIN versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM


Article 185 (3) of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act (1 of 1913), Section 15, the right to literacy was denied by the lower courts by the Supreme Court on appeal where the petitioner failed to show that. The High Court has either misrepresented or neglected any material. Part of the evidence on record in relation to the issue in question

1985 S C M R 1604 (2)

Present: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Shafiur Rahman, JJ

ILAM DIN and another‑‑Petitioners

versus

MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others Respondents

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 417 of 1978, decided on 23rd February, 1985.

(Against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 11‑6‑1978, passed in R.S.A. No. 310 of 1978).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Punjab Pre‑emption Act (1 of 1913), S. 15‑‑Superior right of Pre‑emption‑‑‑ Concurrent findings of facts by lower Courts‑ Leave to appeal refused by Supreme Court where petitioner failed to show that High Court either misread or ignored any material portion of evidence on record with respect to issue in question.

Raja Muhammad Muzaffar, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Sher Zaman, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents 1 and 2.

Date of hearing: 23rd February, 1985.

ORDER

ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑

Ilam Din and Mst. Meraj Begum seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court, dated 11‑6‑1978, dismissing their R.S.A. (No.310 of 1978) in a pre‑emption case.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have superior right of pre‑emption as compared to the respondents and that the learned Courts below have erred in giving finding to the contrary. We, however, notice that the learned High Court had dismissed petitioners' R.S.A. on the ground that the matter stood concluded by the finding of fact. The petitioners' counsel has not been able to show that the learned High Court has either misread or ignored any material portion of the evidence on the record with respect to the issue in question. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

A. A. Leave refused.

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
family advocate from Malakwal 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.