1975 PLP 188 (SCMR)
Mian REHMATULLAH — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AKRAM AND OTHERS — Respondents
| Citation | 1975 PLP 188 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mian REHMATULLAH — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AKRAM AND OTHERS — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1975 PLP 188 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1975 PLP 188 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1975 PLP 188 (SCMR) (Mian REHMATULLAH — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AKRAM AND OTHERS — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Nawaz Kasuri, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 3rd December 1974.
- Muhammad Nawaz Kasuri, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated I1-1-1974 in Writ Petition No. 52-R of 1974). .-- Art. 199-Writ-Laches - Petitioner filing writ petition nearly 13 years after passing of order by Settlement authority and claiming ignorance of order till more than 12 years after passing of order- Settlement authority's order mentioning presence of parties and their counsel at time of pronouncement of order-No reasonable person, held, would wait for such a long period to know result of his application-No exception, held, could be taken to High Court's order dismissing writ petition on ground of laches.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Nawaz Kasuri, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing : 3rd December 1974. MUHAMMAD YAQUB Ali, J.‑On 8th August 1951, the Settlement Commissioner dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner herein against the order of transfer of the house in dispute in favour of the respondent. The parties were heard and the order announced to them. On 11th January 1974, the petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court claiming ignorance of the order passed by the Settlement Commis sioner on the 8th August 1961. The learned Single Judge did not find any ground for condoning the delay of more than 12 years and dismissed the writ petition for laches. The petitioner now seeks leave to appeal reiterating that he has no knowledge of the order passed by the learned Settlement Commissioner. We are unable to accept the statement made by the petitioner as mentioned above. It is clearly stated in the order of the Settlement Commissioner that the parties and their counsel were present when the order was announced. In any case, no reasonable person will wait for nearly 13 years to know the result of revision petition which tie had filed in the Court of Settlement Commissioner. In the circumstances no exception can be taken to the order passed bpi the High Court. Leave to appeal is refused. Petition dismissed.