1989 PLP 2486 (CLC)
BASHIR and others‑‑Petitioners Versus NASRULLAH KHAN and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 2486 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Board of Revenue Punjab |
| Bench Members | Syed Sarfraz Hussain, Member (Revenue) |
| Parties | BASHIR and others‑‑Petitioners Versus NASRULLAH KHAN and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Punjab Land Reforms (Procedure of Ejectment Suits) Rules, 1977‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 2486 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Land Reforms (Procedure of Ejectment Suits) Rules, 1977‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 2486 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Board of Revenue Punjab bench comprising: Syed Sarfraz Hussain, Member (Revenue).
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 2486 (CLC) (BASHIR and others‑‑Petitioners Versus NASRULLAH KHAN and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Jamshed Ali Shah for Petitioners.
- Malik Talib Hussain Awan for Respondents Nos.l and 5 to 9. Rest of Respondents: Ex parte.
- Date of hearing: 23rd April, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑8. 4(5)‑‑Deciding of ejectment cases by Assistant Commissioner within 60 days of institution is mandatory‑‑ Court having failed to decide case within the stipulated period of 60 days, case shall stand automatically transferred to Court of Collector concerned‑‑Order of Assistant Commissioner decided after the expiry of stipulated period was thus coram non judice‑‑Subsequent orders passed by Collector and Additional Commissioner were also not sustainable‑‑Orders of Courts below were set aside and case was remanded to Collector for decision in accordance with provision of R.4(5).
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑8. 4(5)‑‑Deciding of ejectment cases by Assistant Commissioner within 60 days of institution is mandatory‑‑ Court having failed to decide case within the stipulated period of 60 days, case shall stand automatically transferred to Court of Collector concerned‑‑Order of Assistant Commissioner decided after the expiry of stipulated period was thus coram non judice‑‑Subsequent orders passed by Collector and Additional Commissioner were also not sustainable‑‑Orders of Courts below were set aside and case was remanded to Collector for decision in accordance with provision of R.4(5). Syed Jamshed Ali Shah for Petitioners. Malik Talib Hussain Awan for Respondents Nos.l and 5 to
9. Rest of Respondents: Ex parte. Date of hearing: 23rd April, 1989. This petition has been filed against the order dated 26‑8‑1987 of the Additional Commissioner (Rev.), Multan, whereby revision petition of the petitioners was dismissed.
2. I have heard the parties at length and have examined the record of the case minutely. It is mandatory for the AC‑1 to decide ejectment cases within 60 days of institution and if the said Court fails to decide a case within the stipulated period of 60 days, the case shall stand automatically transferred to the Court of Collector concerned. In the instant case the AC‑1 in utter disregard to this provision of law decided the case after the expiry of stipulated period. In view of this the order of Assistant Collector Ist Grade dated 12‑1‑1986 is coram non judice. As such subsequent orders passed on the basis of the said void order vis‑a vis Collector's order dated 16‑6‑1986 and Additional Commissioner's order dated 26‑8‑1987 are also not sustainable. Resultantly the revision petition is accepted, the orders of the Courts below are set aside and the case is referred back to the Collector with the direction that the case will be decided in accordance with provision of Rule 4(5) of the Punjab Land Reforms (Procedure of Ejectment Suits) Rules, 1977, within 30 days of the receipt of this order. M.AK/321/11 Case remanded.