1981 PLP 586 (CLC)
JUMO‑Appellant Versus PROVINCE OF WEST PAKISTAN AND 3 OTHERS — Respondents
| Citation | 1981 PLP 586 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Abdul Hayee Kureshi, J |
| Parties | JUMO‑Appellant Versus PROVINCE OF WEST PAKISTAN AND 3 OTHERS — Respondents |
| Primary Law | State Land‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1981 PLP 586 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: State Land‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1981 PLP 586 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Abdul Hayee Kureshi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1981 PLP 586 (CLC) (JUMO‑Appellant Versus PROVINCE OF WEST PAKISTAN AND 3 OTHERS — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ramchand for Appellant.
- Ali Murtaza Hussain for A: G. (Sind) for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 23rd February, 1980.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑ Hur Claim Policy read with Government Order No. R‑10456‑H(b) 44 dated 27‑11‑1947‑Allotment of State land‑Land granted to appellant situated in area of land reserved for Reserved forest‑Land in question hence not available for allotment and grant in appellant's favour, held, ineffective and void‑Appellant's father (predecessor‑in -interest of appellant) not alleged to have not been entitled to land on account of Hur Claim Policy, appellant, held further, entitled to same area of land on account of compensation awardable to father of appellant as a consequence of Hur Claim Policy.
Judgment & Decree
PROVINCE OF WEST PAKISTAN AND 3 OTHERS
Respondents 1st Civil Appeal No. 27 of 1968, decided on 25th February, 1980. ‑‑‑ Hur Claim Policy read with Government Order No. R‑10456‑H(b) 44 dated 27‑11‑1947‑Allotment of State land‑Land granted to appellant situated in area of land reserved for Reserved forest‑Land in question hence not available for allotment and grant in appellant's favour, held, ineffective and void‑Appellant's father (predecessor‑in -interest of appellant) not alleged to have not been entitled to land on account of Hur Claim Policy, appellant, held further, entitled to same area of land on account of compensation awardable to father of appellant as a consequence of Hur Claim Policy. Ramchand for Appellant. Ali Murtaza Hussain for A: G. (Sind) for Respondents. Date of hearing : 23rd February, 1980.