1986 PLP 133 (SCMR)
GHULAM MUHAMMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus SARDAR MUHAMMAD‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1986 PLP 133 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, Actg. C. J., Nasim Hassan Shah and S.A. Nusrat, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM MUHAMMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus SARDAR MUHAMMAD‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 133 (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 133 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Actg. C. J., Nasim Hassan 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 133 (SCMR) (GHULAM MUHAMMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus SARDAR MUHAMMAD‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- A.K. Dogar, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Kadri, Advocate on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 8th October, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against judgment of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench Multan dated 3rd December, 1984, passed in Civil Revision Nos. 430 of 1981 and 431 of 1981). ‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Petition for leave to appeal‑‑No question of law of any importance raised in petition and petitioner wanting reappraisal of evidence on record‑‑Case not fit for grant of leave for reappraisal of order‑‑Petition dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, ACTG. C.J.‑‑‑This order will dispose of Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 1238 of 1984 and Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 153 of 1985, both filed by Ghulam Muhammad against the same respondent, (i.e. Sardar Muhammad) and directed against the same judgment dismissing his civil revisions.
2. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the afore‑mentioned judgment of the High Court, dated 3‑12‑1984.
3. We have heard the petitioner's counsel at some length and also gone through the impugned judgment. The parties are disputing over 31 Marlas of land gifted to them by one Sain Ghulam Muhammad. Each of them have been awarded half of the said land by the High Court but none of ~ them feels satisfied, as each of them wants to acquire the entire land gifted by the above‑said Sain Ghulam Muhammad.
4. No question of law of any importance has been raised and the petitioner only wants reappraisal of the evidence on the record. We, however, do not consider it a fit case for grant of leave for the said purpose. Both the petitions are, therefore, dismissed. M. Y. H. Petitions dismissed.