1970 PLP 503 (SCMR)
DIVISIONAL EVACUEE TRUST COMMITTEE, KARACHI‑Petitioner Versus ABDULLAH AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents
| Citation | 1970 PLP 503 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | DIVISIONAL EVACUEE TRUST COMMITTEE, KARACHI‑Petitioner Versus ABDULLAH AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1970 PLP 503 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1970 PLP 503 (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: 1970 PLP 503 (SCMR) (DIVISIONAL EVACUEE TRUST COMMITTEE, KARACHI‑Petitioner Versus ABDULLAH AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ajmal Mian, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Anwar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 8th January 1970.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi, dated the 24th January 1969, in L. P. A. No. 9 of 1968). ,
S. 4(3)‑Charitable or religious institution‑Sale deed of one property in favour of Panchayat acquired for maintenance of Hindu widows‑Does not by itself prove that any property acquired by Panchayat was trust property or that Panchayat was a religious or charitable institution.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑The Divisional Evacuee Trust Committee, petitioner herein, failed to lead any cogent evidence in support of its claim that House No. O. T. 3/138, Mithadar, Karachi, was attached to a charitable Trust or that the Nasarpuri Community Panchayat, the evacuee owner of the house was a charitable or religious institution within section 4(3) of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958. The transfer of the house in favour of the respondents by the Settlement authorities was, therefore, not open to exception at the instance of the petitioner. No document relating to the constitution of Nasarpuri Community Panchayat was forthcoming. Reliance was, however, placed by the petitioner on the copy of a sale deed of another property in favour of the Panchayat acquired for the maintenance of Hindu widows. This did not by itself prove that the Nasarpuri Panchayat was a religious or charitable institution or that any property acquired by the Panchayat was trust property. The view taken by the Settlement authorities and the High Court is, in the circumstances, plainly correct. The petition for leave to appeal is dismissed. Leave refused.