1987 PLP 691 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ISHAQ‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 691 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ISHAQ‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 691 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 691 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 691 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ISHAQ‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Iftikharul Haq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- A.R. Shaukat, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Aslam Choudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent. Date of hearing: 19th January, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 4th October, 1981 passed in Intra‑Court Appeal No. 628 of 1980). ‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972). S. 3‑‑Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S.10 & Sched.‑‑Settlement Schemes Nos. VI & VIII‑‑Intra‑Court appeal‑ Finding of fact that the portion of disputed property claimed by petitioner was earlier transferred in favour of respondent on C.S. Form and that neither the petitioner had applied for its transfer under Settlement Scheme No. VI nor could Settlement Authorities transfer same under Settlement Scheme No. VIII‑‑Such finding of fact could not be challenged in Intra‑Court Appeal and consequently the appeal of petitioner was rightly dismissed‑‑Leave to appeal refused
Judgment & Decree
‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972). S. 3‑‑Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S.10 & Sched.‑‑Settlement Schemes Nos. VI & VIII‑‑Intra‑Court appeal‑ Finding of fact that the portion of disputed property claimed by petitioner was earlier transferred in favour of respondent on C.S. Form and that neither the petitioner had applied for its transfer under Settlement Scheme No. VI nor could Settlement Authorities transfer same under Settlement Scheme No. VIII‑‑Such finding of fact could not be challenged in Intra‑Court Appeal and consequently the appeal of petitioner was rightly dismissed‑‑Leave to appeal refused Iftikharul Haq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. A.R. Shaukat, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Aslam Choudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent. Date of hearing: 19th January, 1987. JAVID IQBAL, J.‑‑Leave to appeal is being sought against the order passed by a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court Lahore dated 4th October, 1981 in Inter Court Appeal No. 628 of 1980. There is a finding of fact to the effect that the portion claimed by the petitioner of the disputed property namely No. A/72 Rawalpindi was earlier transferred in favour of the respondent on C.S. Form. The property in question could not be transferred to the present petitioner as plot on his LH Form. He had not applied for its transfer under Settlement Scheme No. VI. Similarly, the Settlement authorities could not transfer the said property in his favour under Settlement Scheme No. VIII because it was not available any more due to its transfer earlier in favour of the respondent. This finding of fact could not be challenged in I . C . A . and consequently the appeal of the petitioner was rightly dismissed. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and in the face of the aforesaid finding of fact no case is made out for interference. Therefore, the leave is refused. S.Q./M‑31/S Leave to appeal refused.