SCMR 2005

2005 PLP 1676 (SCMR)

KHALID SHAFIQ — Petitioner Versus ALLAH DITTA and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Petition No.1899-L of 2001, decided on 4th August, 2004.
Honorable Judges
Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and M. Javed Buttar, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2005 PLP 1676 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and M. Javed Buttar, JJ
Parties KHALID SHAFIQ — Petitioner Versus ALLAH DITTA and others — Respondents
Primary Law Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1676 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1676 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and M. Javed Buttar, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1676 (SCMR) (KHALID SHAFIQ — Petitioner Versus ALLAH DITTA and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912)

Representation

  • Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
  • Rana Muhammad Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 4th August, 2004.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment dated 22-3-2001 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in R.S.A. No.62 of 1985).

S.19

Transfer --S.19

Transfer of property

Bar contained in S.19 of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912

Applicability

Entering into agreement to sell

High Court had not examined all the issues in the light of the material available on record

Both the parties agreed to remand of the case to High Court for considering the issue regarding entering of lessee into agreement to sell with the defendant

Supreme Court conceding to the request of both the parties, remanded the case to High Court for decision afresh

Appeal was allowed.

Judgment & Decree

IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.

This petition for - leave to appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 22nd March, 2001 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore.

2. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the parties that learned High Court while disposing of R.S.A. No.62 of 1985 gave its findings only on two points i.e. regarding bar of section 19 of the Colonization Act, 1912 on transfer of the property by Abdul Jabbar in favour of respondent No.1 Allah Ditta and on the question relating to bona fides of the petitioner Khalid Shafique to purchase the property vide sale-deed dated 3rd March, 1976 (Exh.D.1). But as far as other issues are concerned, which are very important particularly the authority of respondent No.3 to enter into agreement to sell dated 17th February, 1976 with the respondent No.1, have not been attended to, therefore, they agreed that on setting aside impugned judgment, case may be remanded to the learned High Court for the decision of R.S.A. No.62 of 1985 afresh, after providing opportunity of hearing to all concerned with liberty to petitioner to put forward the pleas in respect of the issues which were abandoned by respondent No.1 before the Appellate Court and High Court.

3. We have examined the impugned judgment carefully as well as the judgments of the trial and Appellate Courts. On our independent consideration of the matter, we are of the opinion that High Court may have examined to all issues in the light of the arguments put forward by both the sides and the material available on record, particularly concerning issue to the effect that as to whether respondent No.3 has lawful authority to enter into agreement to sell dated 3rd March, 1976 with respondent No.1. Therefore, request of both the sides is conceded to and impugned judgment dated 22nd March, 2001 is set aside. Case is remanded to the High Court for fresh decision of the R.S.A. 62 of 1985, keeping in view the observations made hereinabove. Petition is converted into appeal and disposed of in above terms. No order as to costs. M.H./K-25/S Case remanded.