CLC 1987

1987 PLP 1218 (CLC)

BAHAWAL and 2 others‑‑Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD QAMAR KHAN and others‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
‑‑‑S. 2‑A(b) & (c) as amended by West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (Amendment) Ordinance (XIII of 1983)‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), 5.100‑‑Custom‑‑Alienation by a person inheriting agricultural land under custom‑‑Validity of such alienation challenged by persons claiming reversionary rights‑‑Effect of amending Ordinance XIII of 1983 on reversionary rights‑‑ Reversionary rights of persons claiming under custom culminating into decrees and confirmation of such rights by appellate decrees having become void by virtue of S.2‑A(b) of Act V of 1962 as amended by Ordinance XIII of 1983, appeals pending against such decrees before High Court, held, stood abated.
Decided Date
Regular Second Appeal No. 194 of 1966, decided on 7th January, 1987.
Honorable Judges
Amjad khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1987 PLP 1218 (CLC)
Forum / Court ‑‑‑S. 2‑A(b) & (c) as amended by West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (Amendment) Ordinance (XIII of 1983)‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), 5.100‑‑Custom‑‑Alienation by a person inheriting agricultural land under custom‑‑Validity of such alienation challenged by persons claiming reversionary rights‑‑Effect of amending Ordinance XIII of 1983 on reversionary rights‑‑ Reversionary rights of persons claiming under custom culminating into decrees and confirmation of such rights by appellate decrees having become void by virtue of S.2‑A(b) of Act V of 1962 as amended by Ordinance XIII of 1983, appeals pending against such decrees before High Court, held, stood abated.
Bench Members Amjad khan, J
Parties BAHAWAL and 2 others‑‑Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD QAMAR KHAN and others‑‑Respondents
Primary Law West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (V of 1962)‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 1218 (CLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (V of 1962)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 1218 (CLC)?

The case was heard and decided by the ‑‑‑S. 2‑A(b) & (c) as amended by West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (Amendment) Ordinance (XIII of 1983)‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), 5.100‑‑Custom‑‑Alienation by a person inheriting agricultural land under custom‑‑Validity of such alienation challenged by persons claiming reversionary rights‑‑Effect of amending Ordinance XIII of 1983 on reversionary rights‑‑ Reversionary rights of persons claiming under custom culminating into decrees and confirmation of such rights by appellate decrees having become void by virtue of S.2‑A(b) of Act V of 1962 as amended by Ordinance XIII of 1983, appeals pending against such decrees before High Court, held, stood abated. bench comprising: Amjad khan, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 1218 (CLC) (BAHAWAL and 2 others‑‑Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD QAMAR KHAN and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (V of 1962)‑‑

Representation

  • Ch. Muhammad Hassan for Appellants.
  • Malik Muhammad Jaffar for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 2nd June, 1984.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑S. 2‑A(b) & (c) [as amended by West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (Amendment) Ordinance (XIII of 1983)]‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), 5.100‑‑Custom‑‑Alienation by a person inheriting agricultural land under custom‑‑Validity of such alienation challenged by persons claiming reversionary rights‑‑Effect of amending Ordinance XIII of 1983 on reversionary rights‑‑ Reversionary rights of persons claiming under custom culminating into decrees and confirmation of such rights by appellate decrees having become void by virtue of S.2‑A(b) of Act V of 1962 [as amended by Ordinance XIII of 1983], appeals pending against such decrees before High Court, held, stood abated.

Judgment & Decree

‑‑‑S. 2‑A(b) & (c) [as amended by West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (Amendment) Ordinance (XIII of 1983)]‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), 5.100‑‑Custom‑‑Alienation by a person inheriting agricultural land under custom‑‑Validity of such alienation challenged by persons claiming reversionary rights‑‑Effect of amending Ordinance XIII of 1983 on reversionary rights‑‑ Reversionary rights of persons claiming under custom culminating into decrees and confirmation of such rights by appellate decrees having become void by virtue of S.2‑A(b) of Act V of 1962 [as amended by Ordinance XIII of 1983], appeals pending against such decrees before High Court, held, stood abated. Ch. Muhammad Hassan for Appellants. Malik Muhammad Jaffar for Respondents. Date of hearing: 2nd June, 1984. A usual declaratory suit under Custom filed by respondent No.l Muhammad Qamar Khan to challenge sale of agricultural land, measuring 341 Kanals 17 Marlas situated in Chak No.65/13 Tehsil Nankana Sahib made by his father Muhammad Aslam Khan respondent No. 2, in favour of Bahawal and 2 other defendant‑appellants herein, by means of a registered deed dated 23‑2‑1954; as being ineffective against his reversionary interest for the reason of its being the ancestral land qua him held by the vendor and being without consideration and legal necessity was dismissed by the trial Court on 8‑7‑1965 but was decreed in appeal on 1‑11‑1965 by a learned Additional District Judge upon reversing the trial Court's findings under issues Nos. 2 and 4 which relate respectively to the application of custom of restricted power of alienation and the consideration and necessity for the sale. This decree is assailed in this second appeal instituted in the year 1966.

2. By virtue of section 2‑A (b) of Act V of 1962, as inserted by the Punjab Ordinance XIII of 1983, that appellate decree affirming the right of the plaintiff has become void and by virtue of clause (c) thereof, this appeal itself has abated. The same is accordingly dismissed, without any order as to costs. H.B.T./B‑2/L Appeal dismissed