1989 PLP 1759 (SCMR)
Sufi GHULAM MOHYUDDIN‑‑Petitioner Versus D. S. C., JHELUM Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1759 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | Sufi GHULAM MOHYUDDIN‑‑Petitioner Versus D. S. C., JHELUM Respondent |
| Primary Law | Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1759 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1759 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1759 (SCMR) (Sufi GHULAM MOHYUDDIN‑‑Petitioner Versus D. S. C., JHELUM Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Ata Ullah, Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of Sh. Ghias Muhammad. Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
- Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 17th July, 1988.
- S. M. Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Inayat Hussain,
- GHULAM MWADDID, J.‑‑Ch. Ata Ullah, Advocate, on behalf of Sh. Ghias Mohammad, Senior Advocate, who is counsel in these cases submits that in spite of best efforts, the counsel has not been able to contact the petitioners.
- Sh. Muhammad Nasim, Advocate, appearing for the respondent in all the cases submits that the Deputy Settlement Commissioner has passed an order cancelling the land in dispute on the ground of fraud. He submits that these petitions as such have become infructuous.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of Lahore High Court dated 15‑12‑1980 in I.C.A.No. 286 of 1979). ‑S.10‑‑Constitution of Pakistan. (1973),Art. 185(3)‑‑Deputy Settlement Commissioner had passed order canceling allotment of the land in dispute on the ground of fraud‑‑Petitions having become infructuous were dismissed. S. M. Nasim, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Inayat Hussain,
Judgment & Decree
GHULAM MWADDID, J.‑‑Ch. Ata Ullah, Advocate, on behalf of Sh. Ghias Mohammad, Senior Advocate, who is counsel in these cases submits that in spite of best efforts, the counsel has not been able to contact the petitioners. Sh. Muhammad Nasim, Advocate, appearing for the respondent in all the cases submits that the Deputy Settlement Commissioner has passed an order cancelling the land in dispute on the ground of fraud. He submits that these petitions as such have become infructuous. In view of the submission of learned counsel for the respondent these petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous. M.A.K./G‑201/S Petitions dismissed.