1986 PLP 1276 (CLC)
MUHAMMAD AYUB‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1276 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Zafarullah and |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AYUB‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL |
| Primary Law | Punjab Local Councils (Election Petitions) Rules, 1979‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1276 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Local Councils (Election Petitions) Rules, 1979‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1276 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Zafarullah and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1276 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD AYUB‑‑Petitioner Versus ELECTION TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muzarrmal Khan for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Sharif Chauhan for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑R. 4‑‑Election petition‑‑Question of compliance or non‑compliance of provision of Rules‑‑Determination‑‑Whether petitioner had supplied copy of Election petition to respondent or not, such question and consequences thereof, held, to be determined after taking evidence.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ZAFARULLAH, J.‑‑The election petition was dismissed by the Tribunal on an oral objection of respondent No. 2 that the petitioner had not provided to him a copy of the election petition. The petitioner, on the other hand, insists that a copy had been supplied and that this question had to be tried before his petition could be dismissed. The petitioner has furnished an affidavit sworn by Mr. Muhammad Abdul Rehman Janjua, Advocate to the effect that the question of supply of copy was not an admitted fact and had yet to be tried.
2. The question whether the provisions of rule 4 have been complied with or not and the consequences thereof is a question, which should have been determined after taking evidence. The petition is, therefore, allowed and the matter remitted to the Election Tribunal Sialkot for fresh decision on this question. There shall be no order as to costs. H . B . T . Petition allowed.