1980 PLP 136 (SCMR)
GAULAM HUSSAIN-Petitioner Versus QADAR KHAN-Respondent
| Citation | 1980 PLP 136 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ---O. XXVI-Review-Each one of grounds urged in support of review application elaborately dealt with its judgment sought to be reviewed-Counsel as such seeking a rehearing of case-Such cause, held, beyond scope of review applications. Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 188.-Review. |
| Bench Members | G. Safdar Shah and Karam Elahee Chauhan, JJ |
| Parties | GAULAM HUSSAIN-Petitioner Versus QADAR KHAN-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Supreme Court Rules, 1956 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1980 PLP 136 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Supreme Court Rules, 1956 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1980 PLP 136 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ---O. XXVI-Review-Each one of grounds urged in support of review application elaborately dealt with its judgment sought to be reviewed-Counsel as such seeking a rehearing of case-Such cause, held, beyond scope of review applications. Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 188.-Review. bench comprising: G. Safdar Shah and Karam Elahee Chauhan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1980 PLP 136 (SCMR) (GAULAM HUSSAIN-Petitioner Versus QADAR KHAN-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Afzal Bangash, Advocate instructed by M. Qasim Imam, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing : 24th April, 1979.
- Muhammad Afzal Bangash, Advocate instructed by M. Qasim Imam, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(In the matter of review of the order of this Court passed in C. P. 70-P of 1976).
O. XXVI-Review-Each one of grounds urged in support of review application elaborately dealt with its judgment sought to be reviewed-Counsel as such seeking a rehearing of case-Such cause, held, beyond scope of review applications. Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 188.-[Review].
Judgment & Decree
G. SAFDAR SHAH, J.‑In seeking the review of the judgment of this Court, dated 10th April, 1978, Mr. Afzal Muhammad Bangash, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that (1) since the inception of the Kohat Municipality in 1892, Jangal Khel was being treated as a part of the aforesaid city and had lost its rural trappings ; (2) that by a judgment of the Civil Judge, Kohat, Jangal Khel was found to be an urban area ; and that (3) in view of the Notification No. 4251‑LC, dated 11th June, 1954, publish ed under the authority of the N.‑W.F.P. Government, Jangal Khel was' declared to be a part of the Municipal limits of the Kohat City. His grievance therefore is that in view of the said material brought on the record of the case, the judgment delivered by this Court on 10th April, 1978 is illegal, and hence liable to be reviewed. We are afraid there is no force in this contention. Each one of the said grounds urged by the learned counsel have been elaborately dealt with in the judgment of this Court. And consequently what the learned counsel is evidently seeking is the rehearing of the case on these points which clearly lie beyond the scope of the review application. Now this being a case of pre‑emption, we pointedly questioned the learned counsel to point out from the afore said Gazette Notification of the N.‑W.F.P. Government if the land in dis pute did fall within the Municipal limits of Kohat City, but he frankly , confessed to his inability to do so, and quite rightly, because by going through the Gazette Notification in question there is nothing in it to pin- point the location of the land in dispute with any certainty to the effect whether it fell within the Municipal limits of Kohat City. This petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.