1982 PLP 1009 (SCMR)
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SALEEM AND OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | 1982 PLP 1009 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ----Art. 185(3)-Leave to appeal-Both parties agreeing as to petition for leave to appeal having been filed by mistake of fact and petitioners having been entitled as of right to file a direct appeal before Supreme Court-Petition for leave to appeal hence treated as an appeal Counsel of parties also agreeing as to respondents being entitled to enhanced rate of compensation on their share in land as assessed by High Court-Appeal being time-barred dismissed in circumstances. Appeal to Supreme Court. |
| Bench Members | Shah Nawaz Khan and M. S. H. Qureshi, JJ |
| Parties | LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SALEEM AND OTHERS-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1982 PLP 1009 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1982 PLP 1009 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ----Art. 185(3)-Leave to appeal-Both parties agreeing as to petition for leave to appeal having been filed by mistake of fact and petitioners having been entitled as of right to file a direct appeal before Supreme Court-Petition for leave to appeal hence treated as an appeal Counsel of parties also agreeing as to respondents being entitled to enhanced rate of compensation on their share in land as assessed by High Court-Appeal being time-barred dismissed in circumstances. Appeal to Supreme Court. bench comprising: Shah Nawaz Khan and M. S. H. Qureshi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1982 PLP 1009 (SCMR) (LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SALEEM AND OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Inayat Elahi, Advocate-General, N.-W. F. P. (Peshawar) for Petitioners.
- Fida Muhammad Khan, Advocate for Respondents.
- Date of hearing:. 10th February, 1982.
- Inayat Elahi, Advocate‑General, N.‑W. F. P. (Peshawar) for Petitioners.
- SHAH NAWAZ KHAN, J.‑The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that by mistake of fact, this petition was submitted in this Court; whereas the petitioners were as of right entitled to lodge a direct appeal before this Court as the amount involved therein is in excess of Rs. 50,000. The learned counsel for the respondents also agrees. This petition is, therefore, to be treated as an appeal before this Court. Notice was given to Mr. Fida Muhammad Khan, Advocate, who appeared on behalf of the respondents and he has accepted this notice. Statement of the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents has been recorded wherein they agree that the respondents are entitled' to the enhanced rate of compensation on their share in the land as assessed by the High Court in its order dated 1‑12‑1980. This appeal stands dismissed as being time‑barred, but we pass no order as to costs.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar dated 1-12-1980 passed in RFA-15 of 1976).
Art. 185(3)-Leave to appeal-Both parties agreeing as to petition for leave to appeal having been filed by mistake of fact and petitioners having been entitled as of right to file a direct appeal before Supreme Court-Petition for leave to appeal hence treated as an appeal Counsel of parties also agreeing as to respondents being entitled to enhanced rate of compensation on their share in land as assessed by High Court-Appeal being time-barred dismissed in circumstances. [Appeal to Supreme Court].
Judgment & Decree
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑
Art. 185(3)‑Leave to appeal‑Both parties agreeing as to petition for leave to appeal having been filed by mistake of fact and petitioners having been entitled as of right to file a direct appeal before Supreme Court‑Petition for leave to appeal hence treated as an appeal Counsel of parties also agreeing as to respondents being entitled to enhanced rate of compensation on their share in land as assessed by High Court‑Appeal being time‑barred dismissed in circumstances. [Appeal to Supreme Court]. Inayat Elahi, Advocate‑General, N.‑W. F. P. (Peshawar) for Petitioners. Fida Muhammad Khan, Advocate for Respondents. Date of hearing:. 10th February, 1982. SHAH NAWAZ KHAN, J.‑The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that by mistake of fact, this petition was submitted in this Court; whereas the petitioners were as of right entitled to lodge a direct appeal before this Court as the amount involved therein is in excess of Rs. 50,
000. The learned counsel for the respondents also agrees. This petition is, therefore, to be treated as an appeal before this Court. Notice was given to Mr. Fida Muhammad Khan, Advocate, who appeared on behalf of the respondents and he has accepted this notice. Statement of the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents has been recorded wherein they agree that the respondents are entitled' to the enhanced rate of compensation on their share in the land as assessed by the High Court in its order dated 1‑12‑1980. This appeal stands dismissed as being time‑barred, but we pass no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.