1990 PLP 443 (SCMR)
ABDUL GHAFOOR‑‑Petitioner Versus Haji ABDUL SALAM and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 443 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL GHAFOOR‑‑Petitioner Versus Haji ABDUL SALAM and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act (XIV of 1975)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 443 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act (XIV of 1975)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 443 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 443 (SCMR) (ABDUL GHAFOOR‑‑Petitioner Versus Haji ABDUL SALAM and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Aqil Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Sh. Anwarul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 21st June, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 8‑10‑1986 in W.P.121‑R of 1986). ‑‑‑S.2(2)‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Arts.199 & 185(3)‑‑High Court remanded case to Board of Revenue for its entrustment to some officer notified under S.2(2) of the Act with direction that matter should be decided expeditiously in accordance with law‑‑Supreme Court having found that there could not be a better order than that which was more in favour of petitioner who had not been debarred from participating in the proceedings where whole thing was to be thrashed out, leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Aqil Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Sh. Anwarul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents. Date of hearing: 21st June, 1989. GHULAM MUJADDID, J.‑‑The Constitution petition filed by Haji Abdul Salam was decided by the Lahore High Court by judgment dated 8‑10‑1986. The learned Judge who dealt with the petition thoroughly, examined the legal propositions, merits and entitlement of the parties and then came to the conclusion that it was in tie best interest of justice that the matter be remanded. The learned Judge accordingly observed: "The question as to whether or not the petitioner failed to pay the transfer price or that his compensation book was declared as bogus, requires an inquiry for which there is no room in these proceedings. Likewise, in view of the order which I propose to make, there is no need to give a decision ion the respondents' claim that they acted in good faith and that due to the construction of the buildings the character of the property has gone under a change." With the aforesaid observation, the case was remanded to the Member, Board of Revenue (Settlement Wing‑revenue) for its entrustment to some officer notified under section 2(2) of Act XIV of 1975. The learned Judge further directed that the matter should be decided expeditiously in accordance with law. There could not be a better order than this. In fact this is more in favour of the petitioner. He has not been debarred from participating in the proceedings where the whole thing shall be thrashed out in accordance with law. We, therefore, don't agree with the learned counsel that in the instant case the remand was not called for by law. M.A.K./A‑597/S Leave refused.