1970 PLP 114 (SCMR)
Mst. IFFAT BEGUM-Petitioner Versus Mst. RASHIDA BEGUM AND ANOTHER-Respondents
| Citation | 1970 PLP 114 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mst. IFFAT BEGUM-Petitioner Versus Mst. RASHIDA BEGUM AND ANOTHER-Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1970 PLP 114 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1970 PLP 114 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1970 PLP 114 (SCMR) (Mst. IFFAT BEGUM-Petitioner Versus Mst. RASHIDA BEGUM AND ANOTHER-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Shafi Sheikh, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Nazar Khan, Senior Attorney for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 3rd October 1967.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 26th April 1967, in Writ Petition No. 1140-R of 1964). Displaced Persons Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), Sched., Part I- A and B claiming transfer of house-Contention that A, to the exclusion of B, was transferred whole house without any opportunity of hearing afforded t o B and that A had claimed only a portion of house and so whole house could not have been transferred to A-Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider questions.
Judgment & Decree
FAZLE‑AKBAR, J.‑The dispute in this case relates to a building site No. AA/469‑B, situated in Mohallah Workshop, Rawalpindi. On 22‑2‑61 the Deputy Settlement Commissioner transfer red the entire plot to respondent Mst. Rashida Begum. On 10‑7‑61 the Deputy Settlement Commissioner directed that this plot should be reserved for Mst. Iffat Begum. In the appeals filed by them the Additional .Settlement Commissioner directed division of the plot and gave one‑half to each of the rival contenders and his order was upheld in revision by the Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner. Mst. Rashida Begum then moved a writ in the High Court. The learned Judges being of the opinion that "The first order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner not having been appealed against became final under section 22 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation), Act, 1958", held that the subsequent order transferring a part of the property to Mst. Iffat Begum was without lawful authority and of no legal effect. Mst. Iffat Begum seeks special leave to appeal against the above order. It was contended inter alia (i) that the first order dated 22nd February 1961, in favour of Mst. Rashida Begum was passed by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner without giving notice to the petitioner and without disposing of her application for transfer which was pending since 22nd August 1960, and (ii) that Mst. Rashida Begum had applied for transfer of only half of the disputed plot and as such the Deputy Settlement Com missioner acted in excess of his jurisdiction in transferring the whole plot to her. In our opinion, these and the other points raised in the petition require consideration. We accordingly grant leave to appeal. Security‑Rs. 1,
000. Stay already granted will continue till disposal of the appeal. Leave granted.