1989SCMR277 (PLP)
NIAZ ALI and others Petitioners Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LAND) and others — Respondent
| Citation | 1989SCMR277 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | ---Art. 185(3)--Laches--Petitioner's revision before . Supreme Court and Constitutional petition before High Court suffered from laches and petitioner unable to give any satisfactory explanation before Supreme Court nor able to convince that he had any case on merits--Leave to appeal refused.--Laches. |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | NIAZ ALI and others Petitioners Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LAND) and others — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989SCMR277 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989SCMR277 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the ---Art. 185(3)--Laches--Petitioner's revision before . Supreme Court and Constitutional petition before High Court suffered from laches and petitioner unable to give any satisfactory explanation before Supreme Court nor able to convince that he had any case on merits--Leave to appeal refused.--Laches. bench comprising: Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989SCMR277 (PLP) (NIAZ ALI and others Petitioners Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (LAND) and others — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Raja Muhammad Younas, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 12th July, 1988.
- Raja Muhammad Younas, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 22-11-1981 in W.P. No. 633-R of 1981).
Art. 185(3)--Laches--Petitioner's revision before . Supreme Court and Constitutional petition before High Court suffered from laches and petitioner unable to give any satisfactory explanation before Supreme Court nor able to convince that he had any case on merits--Leave to appeal refused.--[Laches].
Judgment & Decree
GHULAM MUJADDID, J.‑‑Both on the question of laches and merits, the petitioners have no case. Inordinate delay in invoking constitution jurisdiction as well as filing a belated revision before the Settlement Commissioner was not properly explained by the petitioners before the High Court. Learned counsel has not been able to give any satisfactory explanation before us nor has he been able to convince us that the petitioners have any case on merits. Leave is declined. Petition dismissed. M.Y.H./N‑93/S Petition dismissed.