1991 PLP 464 (SCMR)
ABDULLAH KHAN — Petitioner Versus ADDL. COMMISSIONER (REV.) GUJRANWALA DIVISION and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 464 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Shakurul Salam and Rustam S. Sidhwa, JJ |
| Parties | ABDULLAH KHAN — Petitioner Versus ADDL. COMMISSIONER (REV.) GUJRANWALA DIVISION and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 464 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 464 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Shakurul Salam and Rustam S. Sidhwa, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 464 (SCMR) (ABDULLAH KHAN — Petitioner Versus ADDL. COMMISSIONER (REV.) GUJRANWALA DIVISION and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. D. Tahir, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Hamid Aslam Qureshi for Respondents Nos. 3 and 5.
- Abdul Majeed Khan for Respondent No.4.
- Date of hearing: 31st January, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 29-9-1987 of the Lahore High Court in W.P. No. 362-R of 1986).
Art.185(3)
Question of delay which was one of fact, was concurrently decided by three Courts below against petitioner
Orders of Courts below were not suffering from any illegality
There being no merit in petition for leave to appeal, same was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J.‑‑‑This is a petition filed by Abdullah Khan petitioner seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 29‑9‑1987
2. The petitioner challenged in revision an order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Gujrat, dated 11‑8‑1959, which was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner/Collector. Gujrat on 25‑3‑1986, on the ground that the same was time‑barred and the petitioner's explanation for the delay could not be accepted, Another revision filed by the petitioner before the Addl. Commissioner (Re.), Gujranwala Division, was also dismissed for the same reason on 3‑8‑1986. The petitioner challenged this judgment in writ petition which was also dismissed on the ground that the petitioner's explanation for the delay could not be accepted. The question of delay being one of fact, has been decided by the three Courts against the petitioner. These orders do not suffer from any illegality. There being no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed. H.B.T./A‑715/S Petition dismissed: