1985 PLP (2) (SCMR)
Mst. MUKHTARAN BIBI (deceased) and others — Petitioners Versus ATA MUHAMMAD and another Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP (2) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. MUKHTARAN BIBI (deceased) and others — Petitioners Versus ATA MUHAMMAD and another Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP (2) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP (2) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP (2) (SCMR) (Mst. MUKHTARAN BIBI (deceased) and others — Petitioners Versus ATA MUHAMMAD and another Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Khurshid Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 7th February, 1984.
- Ch. Khurshid Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 27-4-1976 of the Lahore High Court in Civil Revision No. 1253/1) of 1975).
Art. 185(3)--Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 25--Transfer of property--Agreement of associa tion--Settlement authorities disallowing withdrawal from deed of associa tion--Jurisdiction of Civil Court barred to interfere with such orders passed by Settlement authorities--Agreement of association before actual transfer of property, held, valid. Haji Ghulam Hussain v. Hamid Hassan Khan and another P L D 1969 Lah.147 and Mst. Fazal Bibi v . Settlement Commissioner P L D 1983 S C 163 ref.
Judgment & Decree
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.‑‑A non‑claimant displaced person entered into an agreement of association with a claimant, whereby he agreed to the transfer of the house in his possession, for which he had applied on an NCH form because he was unable to pay its transfer price and the arrears of the rent. Subsequently, he changed his mind about the above agreement but the Settlement Department did not allow the withdrawal of the deed of association even though the associate, at one stage, was agreeable to the said withdrawal and its transfer to its original occupant. The petitioner challenged the order of the Settlement authorities through a civil suit. This has been dismissed on the ground that section 25 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, bars the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to interfere with such orders, passed by the Settlement authorities. Ch. Khurshid Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioners, in support of this petition, has contended that if the order passed by any Settlement Authority is not convered by law, the Civil Courts had the jurisdiction to interfere. According to Ch. Khurshid Ahmad, the Settlement authorities had issued a P.T.O. and a P.T.D. in favour of the associate‑claimant simply on the basis of the agreement of association although the petitioner at the stage was not even the transferee of the property and had no rights therein, there was nothing he could transfer by the agreement of association. The P.T.O. and the P.T.D. issued to other side were, therefore, without jurisdiction. In the case of Haji Ghulam Hussain v. Hamid Hassan Khan and another P L D 1969 Lah. 147, a judgment delivered by M.A. Zullah, J. (while he was in the High Court) was relied upon by the learned Single Judge in his impugned judgment. Herein, it has, inter alia, been observed:‑ "Therefore, I agree with the Settlement Commissioner that the agreement of association was premature. However, my reading of the Press Note published at page 115 and the Memo. published at page 133 of the Settlement Manual, shows that there was nothing objectionable in the parties entering into an agreement of association before actual transfer of the property." The learned counsel has not been able to show that during the last 15 years or so since the above rule was laid down by the learned judge it has either been over ridden or dissented from. On the other hand it derives support from the recent judgment of this Court reported as Mst. Fazal Bibi v. Settlement Commissioner P L D 1983 S C
163. There is no force in this petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed hereby. M. I. Leave refused.