2005 PLP 1219 (YLR)
MASOOD ASGHAR and others — Petitioners Versus TOWN COMMITTEE, LIAQUATPUR and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1219 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Jawwad S. Khawaja J |
| Parties | MASOOD ASGHAR and others — Petitioners Versus TOWN COMMITTEE, LIAQUATPUR and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1219 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1219 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Jawwad S. Khawaja J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1219 (YLR) (MASOOD ASGHAR and others — Petitioners Versus TOWN COMMITTEE, LIAQUATPUR and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Shamsher Iqbal Chughtai for Petitioners.
- Ahmad Mansoor Chishti, A.A.-G. for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 12th October, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition Resumption of plots sold in open auction
Petitioners had claimed that they had purchased plots in question from the Municipality in open auction and pursuant to said auction, sale-deeds were also executed and registered in their favour, but Deputy Commissioner had ordered resumption of said plots
Deputy Commissioner stated that land in question was reserved for a children park and same could not have been auctioned
Authority further pointed out that amount required to be deposited by way of security as a precondition for participating in bid had not been deposited by petitioners and they also did not deposit bid amount within prescribed period
Which contentions were disputed by petitioners
Question of facts was involved in the case and High Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction, could not embark upon trial of facts
Factual controversy between parties could only be redressed by a competent Civil Court after trial
Petitioners would be entitled to assert their rights in disputed plots by means of a Civil Court.
Judgment & Decree
The petitioners claim that they purchased four plots bearing Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 from the respondent Municipality through open auction held on 6-6-1993. Pursuant to the auction, sale-deeds were also executed and registered in favour of the petitioners on 28-6-1993.
2. Subsequently, on 12-5-1996 the Deputy Commissioner, Rahimyar Khan, respondent No.2 has ordered the resumption of the aforesaid plots of land. According to the Deputy Commissioner the land in question was reserved for a children s park and could not have been auctioned. A number of other illegalities/irregularities in the auction have been pointed out in the comments which have been filed in the connected Writ Petition No.1824 of 2001.
3. The learned Law Officer has also pointed out that the amount required to be deposited by way of security as a precondition for participating in the bid had not been deposited and moreover, the petitioners did not deposit the bid amount within the prescribed period. These contentions are disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. A
4. While exercising Constitutional jurisdiction it is not for me to embark upon a trial of facts. The factual controversy between the parties can only be redressed by a competent Civil Court after trial. A
5. In the above circumstances, the petitioners shall be entitled to assert their rights in the disputed plots by means of a civil suit. Likewise, the respondents will have the right to initiate a civil action for cancellation of the sale-deeds and for voiding the alleged contracts of sale between the petitioners and the respondent Municipality.
6. In view of the above discussion, this petition, however, cannot be allowed. It is, therefore, dismissed. H.B.T./M-895/L Petition dismissed.