P L D 1972 Rev (PLP)
ARIF ALI alias ALLAH DIYA‑Petitioner Versus Mst. NAZEERAN BIBI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1972 Rev (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Punjab |
| Bench Members | A. G. Riza, Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue, Punjab |
| Parties | ARIF ALI alias ALLAH DIYA‑Petitioner Versus Mst. NAZEERAN BIBI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1972 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 1972 Rev (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Punjab bench comprising: A. G. Riza, Member (Colonies), Board of Revenue, Punjab.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1972 Rev (PLP) (ARIF ALI alias ALLAH DIYA‑Petitioner Versus Mst. NAZEERAN BIBI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
State land‑--Allotment--‑Record not showing whether all facts as to who had possession of killas in dispute, who was in cultivating possession of area and of which killas and how these killas were disposed of, were taken into account‑Deputy Commissioner directed to go into all details and decide case accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
Revision No. 21 of 1971‑72, decided on 19th October 1971, District Sahiwal. State land‑--Allotment--‑Record not showing whether all facts as to who had possession of killas in dispute, who was in cultivating possession of area and of which killas and how these killas were disposed of, were taken into account‑Deputy Commissioner directed to go into all details and decide case accordingly. Mst. Naziran's husband (Ramzan) is shown owner In Chak No. 7/14‑L, Tehsil and District Sahiwal. According to the peti tioner she lives with her husband in this Chak along with her four children. The Chak is reported to be about 30 miles from Chak No. 183/9‑L. where the disputed land is located. It is the contention of the petitioner that the entry in the khasra girdawari about Mst. Naziran being self‑cultivator is the village in dispute is a fraud and was done with the collusion of the Patwari.
2. The petitioner has produced a copy of khasra Girdawari which shows him to be in possession of the half of Bara lot, covering square No. 1, Killas Nos. 16, 17, 18, 23, 24 and 25 for the period ending Kharif 1968. On Killas Nos. 18 and 23 his possession continued in Rabi 1969 also. The order of the Additional Commissioner dated 13th September 1971 is not at all clear as to which of the Killa Nos. he was dealing in his order. The petitioner also states that the land was given to Sharif by him and that Sharif was not an unauthorised cultivator. From the record of the case it is not all clear whether all these facts as to who had possession of these Killas, who was in culti vating possession of the area and of which Killas and how those Killas were disposed of were taken into account? The D. C Sahiwal should go into all these details and ascertain as to what are the correct facts in detail with regard to different Killas and decide this case accordingly. The petitioner and the respondents should all be given a chance to present their case. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. Order accordingly.