1987 PLP 2397 (CLC)
MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE‑‑Petitioner Versus THE ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LANDS),
| Citation | 1987 PLP 2397 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Abdul Shakurul Salam, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE‑‑Petitioner Versus THE ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LANDS), |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 2397 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 2397 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdul Shakurul Salam, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 2397 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE‑‑Petitioner Versus THE ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LANDS),). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rao Hamid Mukhtar Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑ Art. 199‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss. 12(2) & 151‑‑Order of High Court passed in constitutional petition, held, could not be interfered with on application under Ss. 12(2) &_11‑51, C.P.C. filed about two years after passing of such order.
Judgment & Decree
GUJRANWALA and others‑‑ Respondents Civil Miscellaneous No.594 of 1987 in Writ Petition No.104‑R of 1977, decided on 24th March, 1987. ‑‑‑ Art. 199‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss. 12(2) & 151‑‑Order of High Court passed in constitutional petition, held, could not be interfered with on application under Ss. 12(2) &_11‑51, C.P.C. filed about two years after passing of such order. Rao Hamid Mukhtar Khan for Petitioner. This is an application under section 12 (2) read with section 151, CPC for setting aside the order passed in writ petition No.104 R/77 on 23‑11‑1985 filed on 7‑1‑1987.
2. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant Is that the writ petitioners have obtained an order with respect to the land of the applicant Feroze Din for purchase under Act XIV of 1975, whereas the applicant has not sold the land. The applicant's entire allotment was cancelled on 14‑9‑1976. He has never raised a figure or demurred in all these 11 years. The petition has been allowed on the plea of the writ petitioners that they were the vendees from the allottee with an observation that if they were in possession and entitled under the latest law viz. Act XIV of 1975, they may apply to the A Chief Settlement Commissioner for sale in accordance with law. No interference is called for in the earlier order passed two years ago ' I on an application filed nearly two years later. For the foregoing reasons, this application is dismissed. H.B.T/M‑253/L Application dismissed.