2008 PLP 542 (CLC)
MUHAMMAD USMAN and others — Petitioners Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Member, Board of Revenue Land Utilization Department, and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 PLP 542 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD USMAN and others — Petitioners Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Member, Board of Revenue Land Utilization Department, and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 542 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 542 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 542 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD USMAN and others — Petitioners Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Member, Board of Revenue Land Utilization Department, and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Ali Abbasi for Petitioner.
- Abdul Khalil, Manzoor Ahmed Advocates and Abbas Ali, Addl. A.-G, for Respondents.
- In terms of the order of this Court, dated 15-4-2004 the learned Additional Advocate-General has submitted his explanation wherein it lids been stated that he dictated the letter, dated 15-4-2004 addressed to the District Officer Revenue, Karachi and Mukhtiarkar, North Town Karachi and dispatch it through. U.M.S. which might have received by the addressee on 16-4-2004. He further states that the orders, dated 11-5-2006 were not in his knowledge, therefore, he did not file any affidavit to explain the position and later on he came to know about the said order. He along with Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, learned counsel for CDGK states that the petition has already been disposed of and the petitioner have no right to the subject land and that the genuineness of the title documents is very much doubted which position has not been clarified in this petition and because of the said reason the petitioner have also filed a suit bearing No.84 of 2003 which is proceeding before this Court.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Title of the petitioner as well as genuineness of documents on the basis of which the petitioners were claiming the title in respect of property in question, were very much disputed, which could not be decided in constitutional petition
Constitutional petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
In terms of the order of this Court, dated 15-4-2004 the learned Additional Advocate-General has submitted his explanation wherein it lids been stated that he dictated the letter, dated 15-4-2004 addressed to the District Officer Revenue, Karachi and Mukhtiarkar, North Town Karachi and dispatch it through. U.M.S. which might have received by the addressee on 16-4-2004. He further states that the orders, dated 11-5-2006 were not in his knowledge, therefore, he did not file any affidavit to explain the position and later on he came to know about the said order. He along with Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, learned counsel for CDGK states that the petition has already been disposed of and the petitioner have no right to the subject land and that the genuineness of the title documents is very much doubted which position has not been clarified in this petition and because of the said reason the petitioner have also filed a suit bearing No.84 of 2003 which is proceeding before this Court. In the circumstances the title of the petitioner as well as genuineness of the document, on the basis which the petitioners are claiming as the same are very much disputed by Mr. Manzoor Ahmed and learned A.A.-G. cannot be decided in this petition, hence, no further order can be passed in this matter. The explanation submitted by learned A.A.-G. is taken on record. The C.M.A. No.1840 of 2004, in the circumstances, is dismissed. H.B.T./M-200/K Petition dismissed.