1993 PLP 1751 (MLD)
HUMAIR ASSOCIATES‑‑‑‑Applicant Versus DILSHAD HUSSAIN SIDDIQI and 9 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1993 PLP 1751 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Syed Haider Ali Pirzada and Shoukat Hussain Zubedi, JJ |
| Parties | HUMAIR ASSOCIATES‑‑‑‑Applicant Versus DILSHAD HUSSAIN SIDDIQI and 9 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1993 PLP 1751 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1993 PLP 1751 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Syed Haider Ali Pirzada and Shoukat Hussain Zubedi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1993 PLP 1751 (MLD) (HUMAIR ASSOCIATES‑‑‑‑Applicant Versus DILSHAD HUSSAIN SIDDIQI and 9 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Sattar G. Shaikh for Petitioner.
- Khalilur Rehman for Respondents Nos.l to 5.
- Niazi A. Khalidue for Respondent No.6.
- Date of hearing: 7th September, 1992.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.116‑‑‑Demarcation and survey of land‑‑‑Court directed survey of land under various survey numbers for demarcation on the application of respondents‑‑‑Appellant contended that respondents having made application for demarcation, appellant should not be called upon to make any payment towards survey charges‑‑‑Further grievance of appellant was that if his land was included in survey proceedings, same would be encroached upon
Respondents agreed to drop the survey number owned by appellant from being demarcated or surveyed‑‑‑With consent of parties, Court ordered that surrey number owned by, appellant be excluded from survey and demarcation and it should be deemed as if Single Judge had not included survey number of appellant for being demarcated in his order‑‑‑Respondents were also directed to pay survey charges. A. Ghafoor Mangi, Addl. A.‑G., Sindh for the Official Respondent,
Judgment & Decree
SHOUKAT HUSSAIN ZUBEDI, J.‑‑‑This appeal under section 3 of Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 is directed against the order dated 3rd. Joe 1992 passed by a learned Single‑Judge of this Court in C.MA. No. 904 of 1g~ in Suit No.732 of 1991 which was moved by the plaintiff praying that tie Superintendent Survey, Board of Revenue, Government of Sindh, Karachi to get the suit land hearing Survey Nos.294, 295, 296, 298 and 299 along With Survey Nos. 302, N8 and 309 surveyed by the staff so that the area and boundary of each survey number be clearly demarcated by affixing pillar stones so as to avoid confusion and encroachment. The appellant herein filed their counter‑affidavit and thereafter on 3rd June, 1992 a consent order was passed directing the Superintendent Survey, Board of Revenue, Government of Sindh to survey the land in question. We have heard the learned counsel and we have also gone through the material available on record. Mr. Abdul Sattar Shaikh, learned counsel for the appellant had argued that so far as the demarcation is concerned it is the application of the respondents and he should not be called upon to make any payment towards survey charges. His further grievance was to the effect. that by moving the said application his land bearing Survey No.294 was being encroached upon. In this view of the matter Mr. Khalil‑ur‑Rehman learned counsel for respondents 1 to 5 has submitted that this Appeal can be disposed of as he is prepared to drop the Survey No.294 from being demarcated or surveyed. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we are in agreement with the learned counsel that the present Appeal can be disposed of as a very short point is involved and the same stands resolved for reasons which we shat: presently discuss. Accordingly we admit this matter and with the consent of the parties we have taken it up for regular hearing. The main grievance of Mr. Abdul Sattar Shaikh, learned counsel for the appellant was to the effect that the learned Single Judge has passed the order dated 3rd. June, 1992 for demarcation and survey of several survey numbers of Deh Mehran. Tappo Malir, Karachi East and if that is allowed to be done the respondents I to 5 will be. illegally encroaching upon the land of the appellant in Survey No.294. Mr. Khalil‑ur‑Rehman learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 5 has proposed that the order dated 3rd June, 1992 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court may be so modified so as to exclude [lie Survey No.294 from being surveyed or demarcated. This proposal is acceptable to all concerned. Therefore, in the light of the submission made by the counsel, by consent, it is hereby ordered that Survey No.294 be excluded and it should be deemed as if the learned Single Judge has not included Survey No.294 of Deh Mehran, Tappo Malir, Karachi East from being demarcated in the impugned order. Respondents Nos.l to 5 are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000 as initial payment and if any further charges accrue the same shall also be borne by respondents 1 to
5. This appeal is accordingly disposed of in these terms with the above modification of the impugned order with no order as to the costs. Ordered accordingly.