1992 PLP 1313 (SCMR)

"

5. Whether the Court has got no jurisdiction to try this suit?" The learned Civil Judge 1st Class, Lahore decreed the suits vide judgment and decree, dated. 6‑6‑1982. Appellant's appeals were dismissed by the learned' Additional District Judge, Lahore vide judgment and decree, dated 22‑1‑1983. The appellant filed revision petitions before the Lahore High Court both of which were dismissed by learned judge of the said High Court on 18‑3‑1986. Hence these appeals by leave.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that in view of sections 8, 10 and 14 of Act XIII of 1975, the Court did not have the jurisdiction in the matter. He also submitted that the counsel for the lady, respondent No.l, had conceded before the High Court that the property was evacuee trust property. In that event, the only course open to the' transferee was to file an application for validation of transfer in her favour under section 10 of the aforesaid Act. Learned counsel referred to Devachand Muljimal v. Deputy Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner P L D 1965 SC 356 and Evacuee Trust Property Board v. Ghulam Rasul Khokhar, and an order in C.P.S. LAs. Nos.366 and 623 of 1979, decided on 6‑12‑1979.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent Mst. Zakia Begum submitted that she was transferred the plot under an agreement of association executed by the original transferee Rehamtullah in her favour which was approved and the lady paid the entire transfer price of the plot. She was issued Permanent Transfer Deed on 3rd of October, 1967. Under section 10 of the aforesaid Act XIII of, 1975, the property shall be deemed to have been sold to the Chief Settlement Commissioner and the sale proceeds shall be reimbursed to the Board to form part of Trust Pool. The appellant can claim the amount from the Chief Settlement Commissioner.

5. For facility of reference, relevant provisions of the statute, Evacuee Trust Properties (Management and Disposal) Act, 1975 (Act XIII of 1975) may be reproduced as under:‑‑ "

8. Declaration of property as evacuee trust property.‑‑ (1) If a question arises whether an evacuee property is attached to a charitable, religious or educational trust or institution or not, it shall be decided by the Chairman whose decision shall be final and shall not be called in question in any Court. (2) If the decision of the Chairman under subsection (1) is that an evacuee property is evacuee trust property, he shall, by notification in the official Gazette, declare such property to be evacuee trust property. (3) If a property, is declared to be evacuee trust property under subsection (2), the Chairman may pass an order cancelling the allotment or alienation, as the case may be, take possession and assume administrative control, management and maintenance thereof:. Provided that no declaration under subsection (2) or order under subsection (3) shall be made or passed in respect of any property without giving persons having interest in that property a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

9. Exemption of property in trust pool from process. No evacuee trust property shall be liable to be proceeded against for any claim in any manner whatsoever in execution of any decree or order or by any other process of Court or other authority.

10. Validation of certain transfers.‑‑(1) An immovable evacuee trust property‑‑‑ (a) if situated in a rural area and utilised bona fide under any Act prior to June, 1964, for allotment against the satisfaction of verified claims; and (b) if situated in an urban area and utilised bona fide under any Act for transfer against the satisfaction of verified claims in respect of which Permanent Transfer Deeds were issued prior to June, 1968, shall be deemed to have been validly transferred by sale. to the Chief. Settlement Commissioner, and the sale proceeds thereof shall be reimbursed to the Board and shall form part of the Trust Pool. (2) If a question arises whether a transaction referred to in subsection (1) is bona fide or not, it shall be decided by the Chairman whose decision shall be final and shall not be called in question in any Court. (3) If it is decided that a transaction referred to in subsection (1) is not bona fide, the Chairman may pass an order cancelling the allotment or transfer of such property: Provided that no decision under subsection (2) or order under subsection (3) shall be taken or passed in respect of any property without giving the person affected a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

14. Bar of jurisdiction.‑‑ Save as otherwise provided in this Act, no Civil Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of any matter which the Federal Government or an officer appointed under this Act is empowered under this Act to determine, and no injunction, process or order shall be granted or issued by any Court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in exercise of any power conferred by or under this Act." A perusal of 'the above would show that when a question arises whether a. property is evacuee trust property the decision of the Chairman, Evacuee Trust Property Board shall be final S.8(1) and if it is so, tile Chairman may cancel the allotment or alienation (S.8(3)), further, it shall be exempt from any process of Courts or other authority (S.9). Section 14 excludes jurisdiction of any Court in respect of any matter which is determinable by any authority under the Act. However, section 10(1) provides that if an evacuee trust property has been utilised bona fide for transfer against satisfaction of claims in respect of which Permanent Transfer Deed was issued prior to June, MA, that shall be deemed to have been validly transferred by sale to Chief Settlement Commissioner and the proceeds shall be reimbursed to the Board. In case, a question arises whether transfer is bona fide or not, it shall be the Chairman whose decision shall be final and shall not be called in question in any Court S.10(2)).

6. From the above provisions it is quite clear and apparent that the Civil Courts did not. have the jurisdiction in the matter. The appellant could have had recourse to the Chairman under section 8 of the Act. Similarly, respondent No.l could/can apply under section 10 of the Act for relief. The proceedings before the Civil Courts were coram non judice. The appeals are, therefore, allowed and the decrees of the Courts below set aside, but the parties are left to bear their own costs. RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J.‑‑‑I agree with the judgment proposed by my learned brother Abdul Shakurul Salam J., but would like to add a note.

2. During arguments the respondents strongly pressed that they were in possession of a small plot measuring 4 Kanals 60 Sq. ft. out of the large disputed plot, which is stated to be evacuee trust property, whereas the possession of the respondents is strongly denied by the appellants. We would have liked to mention that the possession of the said plot, if already with the respondents, should be permitted to remain with them till the P.T.D. issued in favour of Rehmatullah was held not to have been bona fide issued to him, but we would leave both the parties to secure such relief regarding possession as they may desire from the Chairman, Evacuee Trust Property Board himself, as we would not like to pass any order in that connection after holding that the Civil Courts had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. AA./E‑25/S Appeal allowed.