2004 PLP 413 (SCMR)
Syed IKHLAQ AHMED ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ADMINISTRATOR (RESIDUAL PROPERTIES)/
| Citation | 2004 PLP 413 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sheikh Riaz Ahmad, C.J., Mian Muhammad Ajmal and |
| Parties | Syed IKHLAQ AHMED ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ADMINISTRATOR (RESIDUAL PROPERTIES)/ |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 413 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 413 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sheikh Riaz Ahmad, C.J., Mian Muhammad Ajmal and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 413 (SCMR) (Syed IKHLAQ AHMED ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ADMINISTRATOR (RESIDUAL PROPERTIES)/). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Khurshid Ahmed Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 19th November, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
(On review of the judgment of this Court dated 9‑4‑2002 passed in Civil Appeal No.640 of 1995). ‑‑‑‑Art.188‑‑‑Supreme Court Rules, 1980. O.XXVI, R.1‑‑‑Review of Supreme Court judgment‑‑‑Points already considered‑‑‑Re‑opening of matter‑‑‑Grounds urged by petitioner in support of the review petition had already been considered at length in the judgment under review and the same had been found without any substance‑‑‑Petitioner without pointing out any patent error on the fact of record in the judgment, wanted to re‑open the matter and re‑argue the grounds already taken in appeal‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Supreme Court declined to interfere with the judgment passed earlier‑‑‑Review petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.‑‑‑This review petition under Article 188 of the .Constitution of Islamic Republic of‑ Pakistan, 1973 has been preferred seeking review of the judgment dated 9‑4‑2002 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal No.640 of 1995.
2. The dispute in the appeal related to allotment of evacuee agricultural land with the house constructed on, it, under Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958 This Court having considered al' aspects of the matter, concluded that neither the house was independent property to that of the agricultural land nor the Deputy Administrator and Administrator (RP) were competent to re‑open the matter in power under the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons Laws (Repeal) Act. 1975.
3. Learned counsel for the, petitioner has contended that the original order dated 15‑11‑1961 relating to the allotment of land with house, passed by the Additional Commissioner (Settlement) as incorporated in the RL‑II, was not produced during the proceedings before the Deputy Administrator and Administrator (RP), therefore, a presumption would be raised regarding the non‑existence of the said order. The second contention raised by the learned counsel relates to the character of property. It is argued that the house in question was neither a part of agricultural land allotted to the petitioner nor it was ever treated by the Settlement Authorities as such and that it was an independent property.
4. We are afraid the above grounds urged by the learned counsel in support of this review petition having been considered at length in the judgment, were found without any substance. Learned counsel without pointing out any patent error on the face of record in the judgment, made an attempt to re‑open the matter and re‑argue the grounds already taken in appeal and discussed in detail in the judgment.
5. This review petition having no force is accordingly, dismissed. M.H./I‑66/S Petition dismissed.