P L D 1961 W (PLP)
HAKIM KHAN AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus Nawabzada MUHAMMAD UMAR KHAN AND OTHERS
| Citation | P L D 1961 W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | HAKIM KHAN AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus Nawabzada MUHAMMAD UMAR KHAN AND OTHERS |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1961 W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1961 W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1961 W (PLP) (HAKIM KHAN AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus Nawabzada MUHAMMAD UMAR KHAN AND OTHERS). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Landlord and tenant‑Tenant ejected illegally Tenant put back in possession of land in 1959 under new terms and conditions‑Terms incorporated in revenue New terms cannot be avoided by any proceedings in Afzal Hussain for Petitioners.
- Kh. Abdur Rahim for Respondents.
Judgment & Decree
Respondents Revision No. 220 of 1959‑60, decided on 14th February 1961, District Mardan. Landlord and tenant‑Tenant ejected illegally Tenant put back in possession of land in 1959 under new terms and conditions‑Terms incorporated in revenue New terms cannot be avoided by any proceedings in Afzal Hussain for Petitioners. Kh. Abdur Rahim for Respondents. This case has a long history, but for the purposes of this petition outstanding land. marks of it only need be mentioned briefly. The petitioners were some of the large number of tenants of the respondent Nawabzada Muhammad Umar Khan and they had been forcibly or otherwise ejected from the land held by them in 1958. As a result of this "illegal" ejectment a state of tension grew up in the district. Sometime later the authorities apprehending trouble formed an arbitration committee to settle the dispute between the tenants and their landlords. As a result of intervention by this Committee an agreement was arrived at between the parties according to which all the tenants excepting a few were again brought back on the lands in 1959 but on new terms and conditions which were identical with those governing the tenancies of new cultivators which had in the meanwhile been brought in by the landlord. The petitioners have represented that these new terms are not acceptable to them and the order of the Deputy Commissioner in connection therewith should be rescinded. As a matter of fact there does not appear to be any order by the Deputy Commissioner as had agreed that the old tenants be brought back held by them but under new terms and conditions, merely this agreement which has now been revenue records. Obviously the remedy of the tenants this agreement does not lie in a Revenue Court agree with learned Additional Commissioner though grounds, hold that this petition is not tenable K. M. A. Petition dismissed.