SCMR 1985

1985 PLP 880 (SCMR)

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through the Chief Conservator of Forests, Punjab and others‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AFZAL and others‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 735 of 1980, decided on 7th October, 1984.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Shafiur Rahman, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1985 PLP 880 (SCMR)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Shafiur Rahman, JJ
Parties PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through the Chief Conservator of Forests, Punjab and others‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AFZAL and others‑‑Respondents
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 880 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 880 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Kadir Shaikh and Shafiur Rahman, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 880 (SCMR) (PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through the Chief Conservator of Forests, Punjab and others‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AFZAL and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

Representation

  • Muhammad Abdullah Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Ijaz Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
  • Rana M.A. Kadri Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents. Date of hearing: 7th October, 1984.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Sale of Goods Act (III of 1930), S.5(1)‑‑Public auction‑ Highest bid having been accepted, respondent directed to deposit balance amount by a particular date and remove goods‑‑Auction unilaterally cancelled before specified date‑‑Order set aside in Constitutional jurisdic tion on ground that sale transaction had already been completed and could not be cancelled‑‑Decision upheld by Supreme Court‑‑Leave to appeal refused.

Judgment & Decree

Muhammad Abdullah Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Ijaz Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Rana M.A. Kadri Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents. Date of hearing: 7th October, 1984. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.‑‑The respondents were the highest bidders at the public auction held by the Divisional Forest Officer, Gujrat, petitioner No.2, on 5‑6‑1978 for the sale of lots of timber. The bids were accepted by petitioner No.2 on 7‑6‑1978 and he directed the respondents to deposit the balance‑price on or before 25‑6‑1978 and remove the timber by 5‑8‑1978. The Chief Conservator of Forests, Punjab, petitioner No.l, however, unilaterally cancelled the transaction of sale by an order dated 20‑6‑1978. Lahore High Court on being moved by respondents in a Constitu tional petition set aside the impugned order of the first petitioner on the ground that the saletransaction in respondents favour had already been completed and the first petitioner had no right in law to cancel it. , Petitioners now seek leave to appeal from the judgment of the High Court, and the learned counsel appearing in support of the petition submits that since some of the respondents had failed to deposit the balance‑price, the first petitioner, could competently set aside the sale transaction. But surely this was not the reason shown in the impugned order, nor was such a plea advanced before the High Court. Even otherwise, this plea has no support in the record before us. The High Court has very rightly held that since the transaction of sale was otherwise complete, there was no scope in law for the first petitioner to unilaterally cancel the transaction. For these reasons, the petition has no merit and is dismissed. M. I. Petition dismissed.