P L D 1966 W (PLP)
MIR ASHRAF KHAN‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1966 W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | I. U. Khan, Chief Land Commissioner, West Pakistan |
| Parties | MIR ASHRAF KHAN‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1966 W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1966 W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: I. U. Khan, Chief Land Commissioner, West Pakistan.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1966 W (PLP) (MIR ASHRAF KHAN‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Land Reforms Regulation, 1959, para. 4(3) Appeal filed after , expiry of period of limitation‑‑Delay not condoned‑Appeal dismissed as time‑barred‑Instructions of Land Commission in letter No. ASP‑459‑61/5679‑LC, dated 19th September 1961.
Judgment & Decree
THE STATE‑Respondent Appeal No. 637 of 1961‑62, decided on 22nd September 1962. West Pakistan Land Reforms Regulation, 1959, para. 4(3) Appeal filed after , expiry of period of limitation‑‑Delay not condoned‑Appeal dismissed as time‑barred‑Instructions of Land Commission in letter No. ASP‑459‑61/5679‑LC, dated 19th September 1961. This is an appeal against an order, dated the 26th of September 1961, passed by the Land Commissioner, Peshawar. This order is stated to have been communicated to the appellant on the 9th October 1961. The petitioner applied for a copy on 11th January 1962. It was delivered to him on 18th January, 1962. He, however, put in the present appeal on the 12th of March 1962. It was thus filed after the period of limitation had expired. Under the instructions issued by the Land Commission in their letter No. ASP‑459‑61/5679‑L.C., dated 19th September, 1961, such delays cannot be condoned. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed as time‑barred. The appellant should be informed accordingly.‑
S. Q. Appeal dismissed.