P L D 1983 Lahore 444 (PLP)
Mst. ALLAH RAKHI-Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, SARGODHA DIVISION, SARGODHA AND 3 OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1983 Lahore 444 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Fazal-e-Mahmood, J |
| Parties | Mst. ALLAH RAKHI-Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, SARGODHA DIVISION, SARGODHA AND 3 OTHERS-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1983 Lahore 444 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1983 Lahore 444 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Fazal-e-Mahmood, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1983 Lahore 444 (PLP) (Mst. ALLAH RAKHI-Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, SARGODHA DIVISION, SARGODHA AND 3 OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Talib H. Rizvi for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Ashraf Falahi for Respondent No. 1.
- Date of hearing : 8th May, 1983.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199-Petitioner seeking interference on technical grounds Impugned order equitable and flowing from proper consideration of rights of parties-Order not showing any injustice to parties-Despite just and fair decision demand for enforcement of proverbial shylock's pound of flesh, held, not justified in writ jurisdiction which is equitable and discretionary-Petition dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
After a long drawn litigation which saw two rounds, ultimately the dust has been settled by virtue of the impugned order. The officer has taken the view that there has been rateable distribution of the ihatas amongst the litigating parties.
2. I have beard the learned counsel for the petitioner who has tried to pursuade me to interfere on technical pleas. I, however, feel that the impugned order is equitable and flows from a proper consideration of to rights of the parties. The real purpose of Rehabilitation and Settlement Laws to ensure the rehabilitation of the largest possible number has been fulfilled.
3. Under the circumstances in keeping with the policy of taw, the parties must feel content. The order does not show any injustice to parties. 1 am therefore not inclined to exercise my discretion to interfere with the impugned order. It may, however, in the passing be mentioned that the total area in dispute is 15.Marlas. There are 5 parties in possession litigating. Three Marlas have fallen to the share of each party. - I know 'of no concept whereby despite a just and fair decision the demand fort proverbial shylock's pound of flesh could be got enforced in writ jurisdiction which is equitable and discretionary. The result is that this writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Since the parties are poor, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.