1995 PLP 1557 (CLC)
AHMAD DIN‑‑‑Appellant Versus ABDULLAH and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1995 PLP 1557 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Malik Muhammad Qayyum and Raja Abdul Aziz Bhatti, JJ |
| Parties | AHMAD DIN‑‑‑Appellant Versus ABDULLAH and others‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 1557 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 1557 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Malik Muhammad Qayyum and Raja Abdul Aziz Bhatti, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 1557 (CLC) (AHMAD DIN‑‑‑Appellant Versus ABDULLAH and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Petitioner.
- M. Iqbal for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
- Date of hearing: 5th September, 1994.
Headnotes / Summary
Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.3, proviso ‑‑‑Intra‑Court appeal‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Petitioner, on dismissal of his Constitutional petition directly filed against order of Deputy Settlement Commissioner had filed Intra‑Court Appeal against such dismissal‑‑‑Order passed by Deputy Settlement Commissioner under Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, being appealable under the relevant statute instant Intra‑Court Appeal, was hit by proviso to S.3 of Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 and as such was not maintainable. Karim Bibi and others v. Hussain Bakhsh and another PLD 1984 SC 344 and Muhammad Abdullah v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Centre‑I, Lahore PLD 1985 SC 107 ref.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S.3, proviso ‑‑‑Intra‑Court appeal‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Petitioner, on dismissal of his Constitutional petition directly filed against order of Deputy Settlement Commissioner had filed Intra‑Court Appeal against such dismissal‑‑‑Order passed by Deputy Settlement Commissioner under Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, being appealable under the relevant statute instant Intra‑Court Appeal, was hit by proviso to S.3 of Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 and as such was not maintainable. Karim Bibi and others v. Hussain Bakhsh and another PLD 1984 SC 344 and Muhammad Abdullah v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Centre‑I, Lahore PLD 1985 SC 107 ref. Muhammad Ilyas Khan for Petitioner. M. Iqbal for Respondent Nos.1 and
2. Date of hearing: 5th September, 1994. MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J.‑This appeal under section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 arises out of a Settlement matter. The Constitutional petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 4‑2‑1976 of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner holding that the property in possession of the appellant already stood transferred to respondents Nos. 1 and 2, was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 31‑3‑1980.
2. The first question that arises is to the maintainability of this appeal. A The first order in the case i.e. of transfer of the disputed property passed under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, was still in force and that order as such was appealable. Consequently, this appeal is hit by the proviso to section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 as held by the Supreme Court in Mst. Karim Bibi and others v. Hussain Bakhsh and another (PLD 1984 SC 344) and reaffirmed in Muhammad Abdullah v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Centre‑I, Lahore (PLD 1985 SC 107).
3. This appeal is dismissed as incompetent leaving the parties to bear their own costs. H.B.T./791/L Appeal dismissed.