P L D 1966 W (PLP)
ATA MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus HAQ NAWAZ AND OTHERS‑‑Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1966 W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | I. U. Khan, Chief Land Commissioner, West Pakistan |
| Parties | ATA MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus HAQ NAWAZ AND OTHERS‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1966 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 1966 W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: I. U. Khan, Chief Land Commissioner, West Pakistan.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1966 W (PLP) (ATA MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus HAQ NAWAZ AND OTHERS‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Shafi for Petitioner.
- Fazlur Rehman for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Land Reforms Regulation, 1959, para. 19‑Tenant in cultivating possession‑Solitary entry of change of possession made by Patwari disbelieved as based on wrong information‑Tenant in cultivating possession from Kharif, 1958 onwards held entitled to purchase land.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Shafi for Petitioner. Fazlur Rehman for Respondents. This is a second revision filed against an order, dated the 6th of November, 1962 passed by the Land Commissioner, Sargodha, whereby he rejected the revision preferred by the petitioner. The facts of the case are that a proposal to sell 104 kanals to the petitioner was drawn up by the field staff but the Assistant Land Commissioner rejected it and gave the land to the res pondents. The petitioner went in appeal to the Deputy Land Commissioner but it was rejected. He then filed a revision before the Land Commissioner, but it was also rejected. Hence this second revision. I have heard the counsels for the parties and have examined the record. It is established that Ata Muhammad petitioner has been in continuous possession of Killas Nos. 7 to 15 of square No. 173 from Kharif 1957 uptil now. As regards Killas Nos. '1 to 6 of the same square, he is in cultivating possession from Kharif 58 up to the present day. These factors are in favour of the petitioner, but the respondents have been shown as in cultivating possession in Rabi 1959 and that change of possession has been supported by the report in the Roznamcha Waqiati. It appears that the entries were made by the Patwari in the Khasra Girdawari on wrong information. The petitioner has been in possession of the land in dispute from Kharif 1958 onwards; and even now he is in cultivating possession. In these circumstances, he is the person most eligible to buy the land in dispute. I, therefore, accept the revision and direct that the land in dispute shall be sold to Ata Muhammad petitioner. S. Q. Revision accepted.