1977 PLP 499(1) (SCMR)
ABDUL MALIK ETC.‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD GHALIB ETC.‑Respondents
| Citation | 1977 PLP 499(1) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ---O. XXVI‑Review‑No error on face of record‑Petitioner not referring to any additional evidence or any farts not within his knowledge‑Mere fact of Court having taken a wrong view of point urged by petitioner, held, no ground for interference in review.‑ Review. |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ABDUL MALIK ETC.‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD GHALIB ETC.‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Supreme Court Rules, 1956‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1977 PLP 499(1) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Supreme Court Rules, 1956‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1977 PLP 499(1) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ---O. XXVI‑Review‑No error on face of record‑Petitioner not referring to any additional evidence or any farts not within his knowledge‑Mere fact of Court having taken a wrong view of point urged by petitioner, held, no ground for interference in review.‑ Review. bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1977 PLP 499(1) (SCMR) (ABDUL MALIK ETC.‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD GHALIB ETC.‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Raja Muhammad Muzuffar Khan Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Wajid Hussain Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing : 27th September 1977.
Headnotes / Summary
O. XXVI‑Review‑No error on face of record‑Petitioner not referring to any additional evidence or any farts not within his knowledge‑Mere fact of Court having taken a wrong view of point urged by petitioner, held, no ground for interference in review.‑ [Review].
Judgment & Decree
Raja Muhammad Muzuffar Khan Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Wajid Hussain Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Date of hearing : 27th September 1977. WAHEEDUDIN AHMAD, J.‑This is an application for review of the Order of this Court dismissing the petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 562/74 dated 28‑5‑
75. The dispute between the parties is in respect of mortgagee rights in the land in dispute. A suit was filed on 28‑9‑
57. It was held by the trial Court that Mota Khan, predecessor‑in‑interest of the petitioner In 1954 had acknowledged the factum of mortgage The High Court has held this view to be correct and has maintained the decree‑ for redemption which was challenged by the petitioner in the above‑mentioned application for special leave to appeal. Mr. Raja Mohd. Muzaffar Khan, the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the question whether the seal on the report of the Patwari was an acknowledgment or an attestation requires further consideration. He contended that the interpretation given by this Court on 28-5‑75 is erroneous. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are satisfied that there is no error on the face of the record, nor the petitioner has referred to any additional evidence or any facts which were not within his knowledge in this petition. Mere fact that this Court has taken a wrong view of the point s urged by the petitioner is no ground to interfere in review. We do not consider this as a fit case for interference. The petition is dis missed. Petition dismissed.