P L D (Rev (PLP)
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN‑Applicant Versus MUHAMMAD ZAMAN‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D (Rev (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Said Ullah Khan, Financial Commissioner |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN‑Applicant Versus MUHAMMAD ZAMAN‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D (Rev (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D (Rev (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Said Ullah Khan, Financial Commissioner.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D (Rev (PLP) (MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN‑Applicant Versus MUHAMMAD ZAMAN‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
Lambardari‑
Mother applying on behalf of absentee son ‑Case rushed through by Revenue Assistant, without affording opportunity to produce material affecting application and ap pointing another candidate as Lambardar‑Absentee on return applying for setting aside appointment‑Case ordered to be reopened on merits.
Judgment & Decree
The Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division, vide his order dated the 5th May 1947, has recommended the accep tance of the revision petition filed by Muhammad Hussain against the order of the Collector dated the 23rd February 1946.
2. The following pedigree table will be of help in the disposal of this case :‑ SAHIB DIN | ____________________________|________________________________ | | | Dinu Mangu Nur Hussain | | (Dead) | Muhammad Zaman | | (Respondent) Nazar Hussain |______________________________________________________ | | Ghulam Hassan Muhammad Hussain (Now dead) (Appellant).
3. It would appear from the above pedigree table that Ghulam Hassan, lambardar, died in 1943. The vacancy thus caused was contested by the mother of Muhammad Hussain on behalf of the applicant (Muhammad Hussain) and Nazar Hussain for his elder brother, Muhammad Zaman, now serving in the Army. The Revenue Assistant brushed aside the statement of the mother of Muhammad Hussain on the score, that, as according to her own statement Muhammad Hussain had not been heard of for the past ten years, he was dead in the eyes of law and the only other contestant namely Muhammad Zaman could therefore with justification be appointed` to succeed Ghulam Hassan hence his appointment as such by the Revenue Assistant. The miscellaneous application filed by Muhammad Hussain on his return from Persia (Iran) was filed vide Collector's order dated the 23rd February, 1946. Muhammad Hussain preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, who forwarded the same with his recommendations referred to above.
4. Muhammad Hussain and Nazar‑ Hussain on behalf of Muhammad Zaman present and heard.
5. The contention of Muhammad Hussain in this case was that he was in communication with his old mother through out his stay in Iran and his name still appears in the revenue records, which is sufficient proof that he was alive and the Revenue Assistant should not have, therefore, ignored him altogether in this case. Nazar Hussain, on the other side, has nothing to say against the contention of Muhammad Hussain. It appears to me that the Revenue Assistant has rushed through the case by holding it to be an undisputed one and without affording an opportunity even to the mother of Muhammad Hussain for the production of any material id her possession, viz, letters etc., from her son and appointed Muhammad Zaman as lambardar vice, Ghulam Hussan, deceased, and I, therefore, remand this case to the Collector, who, after affording an opportunity to the parties, will then dispose of this case consistent with law. A.H. Case remanded.