1989 PLP 190 (CLC)

Ch. Abdul Razzaq Kamboh for Respondent No.l. Khalilur Rehman Ramday, A.‑G. for Respondents Nos.3 and 4 Date of hearing: 8th October, 1988. The petitioner, Ghulam Mustafa, has moved this Constitutional petition praying therein that the impugned order may be declared without lawful authority and of no legal consequence.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 29‑10‑1984 at about 6‑00 p.m. wife, daughter and son of the respondent Muhammad Ashraf were travelling in a Wagon No.LHD‑6728. The said wagon when reached near Aamar Hotel, Lower Mall, Lahore, it had a collision with an Omni Bus coming from the opposite side. Mst. Tahira Parveen and Mst. Farah Naz, wife and daughter of the said respondent died at the spot and Manzar, son of the respondent, was seriously injured. The A.D.C. (G) with power of Claim Tribunal, Lahore vide order dated 13=4‑1986 proceeded to accept the application of the respondent and allowed Rs.16,000 each to the legal heirs of Mst. Tahira Parveen and Mst. Farah Naz and Rs.5,000 to son of the respondent on account of the injuries received by him. Thus the learned Claim Tribunal allowed tts.37,000 in all to the legal heirs of the deceased and injured. 3.Learned counsel contended that the respondent A.D.C. (G) possessed no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the petition. It is further argued that he has committed gross illegality in record in the evidence and as such the impugned order may be set aside. It is also submitted that the learned Tribunal did not provide an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. The learned Advocate‑General, Punjab, has refuted the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the learned trial Court was competent to decide the petition. 4. ‑ I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Learned counsel for the petitioner was not able to show as to how the learned Claim Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the petition. Additionally, this point of jurisdiction was never raised by the petitioner before the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal after recording the evidence came to the conclusion that the legal heirs of the deceased ,and son of the respondent are entitled to receive the compensation of Rs.37,

000. Learned counsel has failed to point out any jurisdictional defects in the impugned order and as such finding the petition without substance, I proceed to dismiss the same, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. H.B.T./G‑175/L Petition dismissed.