1986 PLP 979 (SCMR)
GHULAM DASTGIR and others — Petitioners Versus HIDAYAT and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 979 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and S.A. Nusrat, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM DASTGIR and others — Petitioners Versus HIDAYAT and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 979 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 979 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and S.A. Nusrat, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 979 (SCMR) (GHULAM DASTGIR and others — Petitioners Versus HIDAYAT and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 11th November, 1985.
- Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 14-6-1980 passed in Civil Revision No. 690/D of 1980). --Art. 185(3)--Succession--Leave to appeal, grant of--Concurrent findings of fact by two Courts on issue of succession--High Court, after examination of issue, declined to interfere--Order upheld by Supreme Court and leave to appeal refused.
Judgment & Decree
S.A. NUSRAT, J.‑‑The dispute in this petition relates to the succession of one Muhammad alias Haji Muhammad deceased as original tenant of a State land allotted by the Collector under the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 who had died somewhere in 1946 leaving behind sons and grandsons. The respondents brought a declaratory suit against the petitioners seeking relief to the effect that they may be declared owner to the extent of 1/3rd share in the tenancy comprised of the suit land as heirs of Muhammad alias Haji Muhammad, a propositus. The suit was decided after hot contest on the basis of evidence and decreed by the learned Civil Judge First Class, Chishtian by his judgment, dated 30‑7‑1978. The petitioners unsuccessfully appealed against the judgment and decree of the trial Court before the Additional District Judge and latter before the High Court through a Civil Revision under section 115, C.P.C. The last order was passed by the Lahore High Court, on .14‑6‑1980 and is the subject‑matter of this petition for leave to appeal. 2. The decision on the issue of succession stands concluded by the concurrent findings of fact given by the learned two Courts below. The learned High Court had examined the issue and found no justification for interference. 3. After hearing the learned counsel and having gone through the record of the case, we are not persuaded to differ from the opinion of the learned Courts below as well as the refusal by the High Court to, interfere with in the matter. This petition deserves to be dismissed which we hereby do. M. I. Petition dismissed.