1989 PLP 389 (MLD)

Ch. Muhammad Rafiq for Respondent No.

2. Date of hearing: 14th February, 1989. The case of the petitioner is that he purchased land from Abdul Hamid s/o Jamal Din and Siddiq Ahmad s/o Abdur Rehman on 10‑1‑1973 who, in turn, had purchased this land from one Fajroo in whose favour mutation of inheritance No. 18 had been sanctioned of the land allotted to one Dalail Khan, measuring 236 kanals plus 7 kanals 4 marlas in lieu of the land abandoned by him in India which was verified on claim form No. 30337 for 238 P.I. Units. The allotment was at Khatas No. 1287 and 1292 of the RL.II of Mauza Chunian, Tehsil Chunian, District Kasur.

2. It is stated that the allotment in the name of Dalail Khan was earlier challenged through a Mukhbari application under Sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958 which was dismissed on 24‑11‑1969. However, on a second Mukhbari application of the respondent No. 2, Ibrahim s/o Burhan the allotment from the name of Dalail Khan had been cancelled and land resumed. It was directed that the land cancelled shall be allotted to Ibrahim against his pending claim, if any. This is vide order dated 19‑8 1981. This is challenged by the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Mukhbari application having once been dismissed, no second Mukhbari application was competent.

4. Learned counsel for the Settlement Department submitted that since the claimant‑allottee had not migrated to Pakistan, the order of cancellation is valid.

5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has submitted that the earlier Mukhbari application had been dismissed not‑on merits. After some arguments and discussion, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner being a bona fide purchaser for value is entitled to the protection of his interests. In any case, the petitioner being in possession of the land even if the allotment has been cancelled, he would still be entitled to be offered the land for sale in terms of Section 3 of Act XIV of 1975, especially when respondent No. 2, Ibrahim is a non‑existent person. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner should be offered the land for sale at the current rate subject to the condition that if Ibrahim, respondent No. 2 is in existence and has a claim vesting in him duly verified and unsatisfied, then the petitioner would share the land in half and half with Ibrahim. In other words, the petitioner will be entitled to purchase the entire cancelled allotment at the current rate but if Ibrahim, respondent No. 2 is forthcoming and has a verified pending claim, the petitioner will surrender half of the land in favour of the said Ibrahim for allotment in lieu of his pending claim. Learned counsel for the Settlement Department has submitted that since the matter is being sorted out between the contesting parties to avoid unnecessary litigation the compromise may be allowed. The compromise offered by the learned counsel for the petitioner is acceptable to the learned counsel for Ibrahim, respondent No. 2.

7. In view of the above, it is directed that the land purchased by the petitioner from Abdul Hamid s/o Jamal Din and Siddiq Ahmad s/o Abdul Rehman who in turn had purchased it from Fajroo in whose favour a mutation of inheritance No. 18 stood sanctioned of the land allotted on claim form No. 3033 ; for 238 P.I. Units at Khatas No. 1287 and 1292 of the RL.II of Mauza Chuman Tehsil Chunian, District Kasur, in the name of Dalail Khan, the petitioner will be entitled to be sold the land on current rate having been in possession, it accordance with Section 3 of Act XIV of 1975. This shall, however, be subject to this that if Ibrahim, respondent No. 2 has a verified claim still pending allotment then half of the land will be sold in favour of the petitioner and the other half shall be allotted to Ibrahim, respondent No. 2 in lieu of his pending verified claim If Ibrahim, respondent No. 2 is so found entitled to allotment, the petitioner shall surrender half of the land in a compact block according to his choice for allotment to Ibrahim. The A.D.C.(G), Kasur is directed to expeditiously give effect to the aforesaid compromise and the order. The petition is, accordingly disposed of leaving the parties to bear their own costs. H.B.T./G‑208/L Order accordingly.