Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art (PLP)
N/A
| Citation | Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | N/A |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art (PLP)?
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: Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art (PLP) (N/A). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- A. R. Shaukat, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
Judgment & Decree
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑‑The Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn our attention to the report dated 18‑3‑1982 submitted by the Deputy Administrator, Residual Properties, Gujranwala the Administrator. Residual Properties, Lahore Division, wherein he inter alia observed:‑ "On going through the record maintained by this Department, the order passed by the learned Custodian and other documentary evidence produced by Zulfiqar Ali as well as the written arguments filed by Muhammad Ibrahim I have come to the conclusion that property No. BXII‑3 S‑56/58 stands constructed on Khasra No.7377/6141 which has been held to be evacuee property. However the construction existing was raised by Ch. Rahim Bakhsh who later on gifted the same in favour of Zulfiqar Ali Bhatti. Muhammad Ibrahim occupied the same as a tenant tinder Ch. Rahim Bakhsh and after the gift he attorned to Zulfiqar Ali Bhatti and became his tenant. On the other hand, Muhammad Ibrahim falsely representing that he has raised the construction applied for its transfer and thus succeeded in obtaining its transfer in his favour. Under the law construction covering more than 1/4th of the total area is an essential prerequisite for making an applicant eligible for transfer on B.S. Form under Settlement Scheme No. VIII. Factually, Zulfiqar Ali Bhatti who has applied for condonation of delay was eligible to apply and not Muhammad Ibrahim who has got the property by hoodwinking the Department. The plot on which BXII‑3 S‑56/58 has been constructed is evacuee property. The construction ex1sting thereon belongs to Zulfqar Ali Bhatti, the present petitioner." The submission of the petitioners' counsel that the petitioners arc being deprived of this property on technical grounds and that Muhammad Ibrahim, respondent No. 3, is being allowed to get away with the property by hoodwinking the Department and that grave miscarriage of injustice is the result, requires further consideration. Leave to appeal is granted. Security Rs.2,
500. The appeal shall be heard on the present record, with liberty to they parties to add further documents, if any. M.A.K./Z‑66/S Leave granted.