1988 PLP 797 (SCMR)
RAB NAWAZ KHAN and other‑‑Petitioners Versus ADMINISTRATOR THAL‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1988 PLP 797 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | RAB NAWAZ KHAN and other‑‑Petitioners Versus ADMINISTRATOR THAL‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Thal Development Act (XV of 1949)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 797 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Thal Development Act (XV of 1949)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 797 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 797 (SCMR) (RAB NAWAZ KHAN and other‑‑Petitioners Versus ADMINISTRATOR THAL‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Rashid Chughtai, Advocate Supreme Court and Iqbal Ahmad Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 29th February, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment dated 1‑11‑1980 of the Lahore High Court in R.S.A.No.176 of 1974). ‑‑‑S.21‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑Leave to appeal, grant of‑‑Statutory right‑‑Denial of acquisition of land‑ Petitioner's claim for return of part of acquired land, denied‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider contention that petitioners had a statutory right to the return of a part of the acquired land in accordance with provisions of S.21 of Act (XV of 1949), which was denied to them.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioners' father was owner of 519 kanals and 3 marlas of land in village Khanpur of Tehsil Bhakkar. The said land was acquired by the Thal Development Authority under the Thal Development Act. On 11-12-1972, the petitioners whose father had in the meanwhile died, instituted a suit for permanent injunction. It was based on their assertion that under section 21, Thal Development Act, as amended by the (Thal Development) Act, 1955, they were entitled to the return of 116 kanals. The suit was resisted by the Administrator, Thal who amongst other pleas took up the position that the petitioners had no cause of action. The trial Court upheld this objection and rejected the plaint. The petitioners' first appeal before the District Judge and the second appeal before the High Court remained unsuccessful. They now seek leave to appeal from this Court.
2. The contention on behalf of the petitioners is that they had a statutory right to the return of a part of the acquired land in accordance with the provisions of section 21, ibid. This was denied to them. In the circumstances, the High Court as well as the subordinate Courts were not justified in non-suiting them.
3. The contention raised on behalf of the petitioners needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs.5,
000. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to parties to file additional documents, if any. The appeal should be listed for, hearing at an early date. M.I/R-41/S Leave granted.