P L D 1959 W (PLP)
MOOSA‑ — Petitioner Versus CHHATTAR KHAN‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1959 W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | M. Z. Khan, Member, Board of Revenue, West Pakistan |
| Parties | MOOSA‑ — Petitioner Versus CHHATTAR KHAN‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Lambardari‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1959 W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Lambardari‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1959 W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: M. Z. Khan, Member, Board of Revenue, West Pakistan.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1959 W (PLP) (MOOSA‑ — Petitioner Versus CHHATTAR KHAN‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kh. Abdur Rahim for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
First appointment‑Should not go to a candidate required to keep peace under S. 107, Cr. P. C. when another suitable person is forthcoming. Respondent in person.
Judgment & Decree
First appointment‑Should not go to a candidate required to keep peace under S. 107, Cr. P. C. when another suitable person is forthcoming. Kh. Abdur Rahim for Petitioner. Respondent in person. Both the parties have hereditary claims. The respondent is a Meo which is the predominant tribe while the petitioner is a Rajput and worked as a temporary Lambardar. According to the record of the case the petitioner has 38 Kanals of land. He has, however, certain copies of mutations to indicate that he has 282 Kanals of land. The most damaging thing against the respondent is that he was required to keep the peace under section 107, Cr. P. C. At the time of arguments the respondents explained that the dispute related to a square of land of which the petitioner was in wrongful possession. The certified copy of the order in the case shows that the dispute was relative to the wife of the respondent. In such cases tile person found at fault is required to execute the bound. In making firsts appointments there is no reason why a Lambardari should go to a person who is required to keep the peace under section 107, Cr. P. C. especially when another suitable person is forthcoming. In the present case the petitioner is quite suitable for appointment. That being so, I do not find that there was reasonable ground for the appointment of the respondent. The result is that the petition is allowed and Moosa is appointed as Lambardar of village Kandoo Khara, Tahsil Chunian, District Lahore. A. H. Petition allowed.