1987 PLP 817 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD YUSUF‑‑Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1987 PLP 817 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YUSUF‑‑Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 817 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 817 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 817 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD YUSUF‑‑Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Abdul Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners (in both the petitions).
- Mehmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record and S.A. Kirmani, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents (in both the petitions).
- Date of hearing: 1st March, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, dated 21‑5‑19$5 in Writ Petition No. 409‑R of 1967 and L.P.A. No.226 of 1969.) 1‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑ Abatement‑‑Failure to implead legal heirs within period of limitation‑‑No application for condonation of delay‑‑High Court finding that both writ petitions and Letters Patent Appeal had abated‑‑Orders challenged‑ Parties living in same premises could not be unaware of death‑‑Orders of abatement suffering from no legal infirmity upheld‑‑Leave to appeal refused.
Judgment & Decree
1‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑ Abatement‑‑Failure to implead legal heirs within period of limitation‑‑No application for condonation of delay‑‑High Court finding that both writ petitions and Letters Patent Appeal had abated‑‑Orders challenged‑ Parties living in same premises could not be unaware of death‑‑Orders of abatement suffering from no legal infirmity upheld‑‑Leave to appeal refused. Sh. Abdul Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners (in both the petitions). Mehmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record and S.A. Kirmani, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents (in both the petitions). Date of hearing: 1st March, 1987. SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑ These are two petitions for special leave to appeal from the judgment dated 21‑5‑1985 of the Lahore High Court.
2. The petitioners in the two petitions filed separate writ petitions in the High Court to challenge the transfer of certain quarters which had been made jointly in favour of Fateh Muhammad and Haider Bakhsh. The petition filed by the petitioner in Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal No.806 was dismissed by the learned Chief Justice on 23‑4‑1969. She and two others filed a letters patent appeal. On 28‑3‑1970 while the L.P.A. and the writ petition filed by the petitioner in Civil Petiti6n for Special Leave to Appeal No.805 were still pending Haider Bakhsh I died. The applications for impleading his legal representatives were made after the expiry of the period of limitation without seeking condonation of the delay. The High Court noticed that the parties lived in the same premises and as such the petitioners could not be l unaware of Haider Bakhsh's death. Accordingly, it held that both the L.P.A. and the writ petition had abated and dismissed them on this ground.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and do not find that the order of the High Court in holding that the L.P.A.I and the writ petition had abated suffers from any infirmity. These petitions are accordingly dismissed. M.I. /M‑52/S Petition dismissed.