1992 PLP 1441 (SCMR)
SHAHEEN AKBAR and 5 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus PAKISTAN AIR FORCE WELFARE TRUST
| Citation | 1992 PLP 1441 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Rustam S. Sidhwa and Saleem Akhtar, JJ |
| Parties | SHAHEEN AKBAR and 5 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus PAKISTAN AIR FORCE WELFARE TRUST |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP 1441 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP 1441 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Rustam S. Sidhwa and Saleem Akhtar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP 1441 (SCMR) (SHAHEEN AKBAR and 5 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus PAKISTAN AIR FORCE WELFARE TRUST). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kh. Muhammad Farooq, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Samad Mahmood Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.l.
- Date of hearing: 12th October, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 3‑8‑1991 passed in C.M.P. 960 of 1991 and I.CA. 7 of 1991). ‑‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Parties, during arguments arrived at compromise which they filed in Court‑‑‑There being compromise between parties, petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and same was disposed of in terms of agreement arrived at between parties.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Parties, during arguments arrived at compromise which they filed in Court‑‑‑There being compromise between parties, petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and same was disposed of in terms of agreement arrived at between parties. Kh. Muhammad Farooq, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Samad Mahmood Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.l. Date of hearing: 12th October, 1991. RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J.‑‑‑This is a petition by Shaheen Akbar and others, petitioners, seeking leave to appeal against the order of a learned Single Judge dismissing C.M. No.960 of 1991 (filed in I.CA. No.7 of 1991) and refusing to restrain the respondents from interfering with the possession of the acquired lands still alleged to be with the petitioners.
2. During arguments the parties arrived at a compromise, which they have filed. The said compromise bears the signatures of both the learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.l. The same reads as follows:‑‑ That the parties have mutually agreed that without prejudice to their respective rights in the High Court in I.CA. 7 of 1991 (now pending) the petitioners will not be disturbed from their possession of Dairy Farm and a house existing in Khasra No.69. (4 Kanals and 7 Marlas), Khasra No.70 (5 Kanals and 1 Maria) and Khasra No.71 (a house in 1 Kanal and 2 Marlas) by the respondents till the final decision of the said ICA. This agreement covers an area of 10 Kanals and 10 Marlas.
3. In view of the above, this petition is converted into an appeal and the same is disposed of in terms of the agreement arrived at between the parties, as stated above. AA./S‑676/S Order accordingly.