1983 PLP (2) (SCMR)
ABDUR REHMAN‑Petitioner Versus ALI BAKHSH AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
| Citation | 1983 PLP (2) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ABDUR REHMAN‑Petitioner Versus ALI BAKHSH AND ANOTHER‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 PLP (2) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983 PLP (2) (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: 1983 PLP (2) (SCMR) (ABDUR REHMAN‑Petitioner Versus ALI BAKHSH AND ANOTHER‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ahmad Waheed Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Ch. Muhammad Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 26th April, 1982.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 17‑12‑1975 in W. P. 313‑R/74). Settlement and Rehabilitation Scheme No. VIII ‑ ‑ Permanent Transfer Deed issued‑Settlement Department; held, becomes functus officio in matter.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑The petitioner seeks Leave to Appeal against the order of the High Court dated 17‑12‑1975, dismissing his writ petition.
2. The facts forming the background of this petition is that Shop No. 348, situated in Kot Mithon Sharif. District Dera Ghazi Khan, was auctioned in 1961. Muhammad Sharif was the successful bidder. He associated with Ali Bakhsh respondent No. 1 and deposited his compensation book for deduction of the 1/4th of the auction price whereupon a P. T. O was issued in his favour. He, however, failed to pay the balance of the price. Two successive notices were issued to him but the same could not be served. The department, therefore, issued notice to Ali Bakhsh, respondent. He moved an application to the Deputy Settlement Commissioner praying that the P. T. O. be amended and the property transferred to him. The application was accompanied by an affidavit of Muhammad Sharif stating therein that he had no objection to the transfer of the shop to Ali Bakhsh respondent. The property was consequently transferred to Ali Bakhsh and the P. T. D. was also issued in his favour. After thirteen years of the said auction, Abdur Rehman, petitioner appeared on the scene and filed a revision petition before the Settlement Commissioner alleging fraud and praying for cancellation of the P. T. D. issued in favour of Ali Bakhsh, respondent which was accepted. He made an application under Settlement Scheme No. VIII for transfer of the shop in question which was accepted On this Ali Bakhsh filed a writ petition. The High Court stayed further proceedings and ultimately accepted the writ petition on 17‑12‑1975, on the ground that the P. T. D. having been issued in favour of Ali Bakhsh, the Settlement Department had become functus officio in the matter.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner did not object to the ground on which the writ petition had been accepted but submitted that there was nothing on the record to show that Ali Bakhsh respondent bad associated with the aforementioned Muhammad Sharif the auction‑purchaser. We notice that the petitioner slept over the matter for thirteen long years and did not object to the transfer in favour of Muhammad Sharif. We are of view that substantial justice has been done in this case. We do not, therefore, consider this to be a fit case for grant of Leave to Appeal. The petition is consequently dismissed. Petition dismissed.