1987 PLP 316 (SCMR)

‑‑‑Arts. 185(3) & 199‑‑Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), Ss. 10 & 11‑‑Transfer of evacuee property‑‑Jurisdiction of Settlement Authorities after issuance of P. T. D.‑‑Properties bearing different numbers permanently transferred to two parties‑‑Dispute arising about demarcation/ trespassing by one party into property transferred to other‑‑High Court's view that after P.T.Ds. had been issued to parties, Settlement Authorities ceased to have jurisdiction in the matter, and that proper forum to settle dispute between them was civil Court, held, was correct‑‑Leave to appeal refused. Syed Misbahul Hassan Abidi, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Ali Imam Naqvi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. A. Karim Malik, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Tanvir Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents. Date of hearing: 20th December, 1986. SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment and order, dated 14‑4‑1980 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby the orders made by the Settlement Authorities after the issuance of permanent transfer deeds to the parties were set aside and declared to be of no legal consequence.

2. The petitioners are the successors in‑interest of Abdul Shakoor who was transferred House No. B‑II‑2‑S‑6 formerly owned by one Harnam Das. Respondent No. 1 purchased at an auction two plots bearing Nos. B‑II‑2‑S‑4 and 5 formerly owned by Lal and Nanak sons of Amir Chand. Both Abdul Shakoor and respondent No. 1 obtained permanent transfer deeds in respect of the properties transferred to them in 1965. In 1969 respondent No. 1 moved an application before the Deputy Settlement Commissioner alleging that Abdul Shakoor had encroached upon parts of the plots transferred to him. By an order, dated 17‑9‑1969 a Deputy Settlement Commissioner directed Abdul Shakoor to remove the encroachments. Abdul Shakoor filed an appeal before the Additional Settlement Commissioner which was dismissed on 21‑10‑1970. He then filed a revision petition before the Settlement Commissioner. By an order, dated 11‑1‑1972 the Settlement Commissioner accepted the revision petition and directed the Additional Settlement Commissioner to have the different properties demarcated and then record a fresh order. After the remand the matter was heard by another Settlement Commissioner who directed the Deputy Settlement Commissioner to demarcate the area of the house of Abdul Shakoor in the first instance and then dispose of the remaining area; in the event the plots transferred to respondent No. 1 were found to be part of the house, the auction in favour of respondent No. 1 should be deemed to have been cancelled. Respondent No. 1 challenged the decision of the Settlement Commissioner in writ jurisdiction in the High Court. A learned Single Judge in the High Court accepted the writ petition and set aside the order of the Settlement Commissioner, holding that after the permanent transfer deeds had been issued to the parties the Settlement Authorities ceased to have jurisdiction in the matter and that the proper forum to settle the dispute between them was the civil Court. The petitioners seek leave to appeal from the order of the learned Judge.

3. It will be noticed that the properties permanently transferred to Abdul Shakoor and respondent No. 1 were owned by different evacuees and also bore different property numbers. The question whether one of the parties had trespassed into the property transferred to the other was one for the civil Court to decide and the learned Single Judge was right in taking the view that the Settlement Authorities had no jurisdiction in the matter. The parties have already gone to a civil Court. That being so, it is not a fit case for granting permission to the petitioners to leave from the order of the learned Single Judge. M.I. Petition dismissed.