1988 PLP 1807 (SCMR)
MAHMOOD ULLAH and another — Petitioners Versus THE ADMINISTRATOR (RESIDUAL PROPERTIES, LAHORE
| Citation | 1988 PLP 1807 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MAHMOOD ULLAH and another — Petitioners Versus THE ADMINISTRATOR (RESIDUAL PROPERTIES, LAHORE |
| Primary Law | (b) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), (a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 1807 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), (a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 1807 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 1807 (SCMR) (MAHMOOD ULLAH and another — Petitioners Versus THE ADMINISTRATOR (RESIDUAL PROPERTIES, LAHORE). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zaki-ud-Din Pal, Advocate Supreme Court and Raja Abdur Razzaq, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in Civil Petition No.1095 of 1981).
- Nemo for Respondent (in Civil Petition No.1095 of 1981).
- S.Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in Civil Petition No.1177 of 1981).
- Zaki-ud-Din Pal, Advocate Supreme Court and Raja Abdur Razzaq, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents Nos.3 to 5 (in Civil Petition No.1177 of 1981).
- Date of hearing: 9th July, 1988.
- Zaki‑ud‑Din Pal, Advocate Supreme Court and Raja Abdur Razzaq, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (in Civil Petition No.1095 of 1981).
- S.Abid Nawaz, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (in Civil Petition No.1177 of 1981).
- Zaki‑ud‑Din Pal, Advocate Supreme Court and Raja Abdur Razzaq, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos.3 to 5 (in Civil Petition No.1177 of 1981).
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgments dated 29-9-1981 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, pashed in Writ Petitions Nos.734/R and 297/11, respectively, of 1979) .
S.5--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Limitation--Time barred petition for leave to appeal--Explanation for condonation of delay not satisfactory--Petition dismissed.
S.10--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)--Transfer of evacuee house--Its subsequent cancellation and resumption due to failure to pay full price--Leave to appeal granted to consider contention that petitioner having paid one-fourth of the transfer price, the house could not be resumed and at worst the unpaid amount could be recovered as arrears of land revenue. Mst. Majeeda Begum v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner II and others 1980 S C M R 827 rel.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑These are two petitions for special leave to appeal arising out of the same judgment of the Lahore High Court.
2. The dispute between the parties relates to a house situate in Krishan Nagar, Lahore. The petition preferred by K . F. Shaifta (C.P.S.L.A. No.1177 of 1981) is barred by time. The explanation given for the condonation of delay is not satisfactory. This petition A is, therefore, dismissed as barred by time.
3. The‑other petition (C.P.S.L.A. No.1095) has been filed by Mahmoodullah. The house in dispute was transferred to him on C.H. form. Subsequently, the transfer was cancelled and the house was resumed on his failure to pay the price.
4. In support of this petition it is contended that as Mahmoodullah had paid more than one‑fourth of the transfer price, the house could not be resumed and at worst the unpaid amount could be recovered as arrears of the land revenue. In support of this contention, reliance has been placed upon a judgment of this Court reported as Mst. Majeeda Begum v. Deputy Settlement Commissioner‑II and others 1980 S C M R 827.
5. The contention raised on behalf of the petitioner needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs.5.000. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any, within two months. M.I./M‑529/S Leave granted.