1988 PLP 566 (SCMR)
REHMAT ALI — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1988 PLP 566 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | REHMAT ALI — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 566 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 566 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 566 (SCMR) (REHMAT ALI — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- A. R.Shaukat, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and M.Aslam Ch., Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Ghulam Muhammad Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court and Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No.5.
- Date of hearing: 20th February, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 24-3-1980 of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No.1165-R of 1974).
Art.185(3)--Ejectment from evacuee property--Question of transfer re-agitated to prolong possession--Rent Controller ordering ejectment in May 1964 after petitioner's admission before him that property in dispute stood transferred to others--Petitioner re-agitating question of transfer by miscellaneous application filed before Settlement Authorities in February, 1973--High Court's order refusing to allow this contrivance to succeed so as to enable petitioner to hold on to the premises in question, upheld--Petition dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--The petitioner, after having been ordered to be ejected from Property No.3/71 under the order of the Rent Controller dated 4-5-1964 before whom he admitted that the said property stood transferred to others, started to re-agitate the question of transfer of this property by filing a miscellaneous application on 24-2-1973 before the Deputy Settlement Commissioner. In these circumstances, the High Court has rightly refused to allow this contrivance to succeed to enable the petitioner to hold on A to the premises in question. We cannot allow this either and whole- heartedly endorse the judgment of the High Court. M.I. /R-38/8 Petition dismissed.