1985 PLP 1375 (SCMR)
TALIB HUSSAIN and others‑‑Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP 1375 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and Shafiur Rahman, JJ |
| Parties | TALIB HUSSAIN and others‑‑Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 1375 (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 1375 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Shafiur Rahman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 1375 (SCMR) (TALIB HUSSAIN and others‑‑Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Masud Akhtar, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Ch. M.A. Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 26th February, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 22‑4‑1979 in W.P. No. 644 of 1972). ‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Punjab Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application (Removal of Difficulties) Act (XXV of 1975), S. 3‑‑Allotment of land‑ Attestation of mutation challenged at belated stage‑‑Petition dismissed on ground of delay and cancellation of allotment meanwhile‑‑Order impugned with plea that law about allotted property itself was not clear and consequent delays were taken care of by statutory provision‑ Cancellation of allotment not borne out from record‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider question of law requiring further consideration.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. M.A. Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents. Date of hearing: 26th February, 1985. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑A Constitutional petition was filed by the petitioners challenging the attestation of a mutation treating Mst. Begum Bibi the allottee as full owner. That order has been maintained upto the Board of Revenue. The High Court by the impugned judgment dismissed the petition holding that it was filed four years after the last order in the revenue hierarchy and in the meantime the allotment itself had been cancelled as being in excess of her entitlement. In seeking leave to appeal, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as the law about the allotted property itself was not clear there was delay and such delays have been subsequently taken care of by a statutory provision (Punjab Act 25 of 1975). As regards the subsequent cancellation of the allotment, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that it is not borne out from the record. We consider that the question raised is one of law and further consideration for which leave to appeal is granted. Security in the sum of Rs. 2,
000. The learned counsel for the caveator has brought to our notice that some of the respondents like Zulfikar Ali (respondent No. 4) and Muhammad Saeed Shah (respondent No. 5) have in the meantime died. The record shall, be corrected accordingly by the respondents. M. I . Leave granted.