P L D 1960 W (PLP)
FAQIR MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus Mst. RAHMI‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1960 W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | M Z. Khan, Member Board of Revenue |
| Parties | FAQIR MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus Mst. RAHMI‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1960 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 1960 W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: M Z. Khan, Member Board of Revenue.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1960 W (PLP) (FAQIR MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus Mst. RAHMI‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ghulam Haider Shah for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme para. 18‑A Tenant bound to pay rent to allottee at rate of batai, prevalent in locality, provided it does not exceed 50% of produce‑Tenant liable to ejectment for failure to pay rent.
Judgment & Decree
Revision Side No. 18 of 1957‑58, decided on 13th January 1959, District Rawalpindi. West Pakistan Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme para. 18‑A Tenant bound to pay rent to allottee at rate of batai, prevalent in locality, provided it does not exceed 50% of produce‑Tenant liable to ejectment for failure to pay rent. Ghulam Haider Shah for Petitioner. It has been contended that the petitioner was not the only tenant but Abdul Razaq was the other one. The Khasra Girdawari, record and report of the Collector which were called at the request of the petitioner clearly indicate that he alone cultivated the land during the period in question.
2. It was argued that the petitioner was paying six times the land revenue till 1951‑52 and prior to that he was paying Rs. 60 p. a. as chakota to the evacuee landlords. This contention does not hold good in view of para. 18‑A of the West Pakistan Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme which has been drawn up under section 6 (1) of the Rehabilitation Act. According to this Scheme a tenant shall pay rent to the allottee landlord in accordance with the rote of "Batai" prevailing in the locality in which the tenancy is situated but not exceeding 50% of the produce. This plea, therefore, fails. The only other point urged at the time of the arguments was that the land was allotted to the respondent after the period in question. That is not so, the land was allotted to the respondent on 26‑5‑1956.
3. The result is that the petition is rejected in limine. K. M. A. Petition rejected.