1989 SCMR 1565 (PLP)
ABDUL GHAFOOR and 6 others Petitioners Versus ABDUL HAQUE Respondent
| Citation | 1989 SCMR 1565 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL GHAFOOR and 6 others Petitioners Versus ABDUL HAQUE Respondent |
| Primary Law | Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act awn of 1958)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 SCMR 1565 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act awn of 1958)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 SCMR 1565 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 SCMR 1565 (PLP) (ABDUL GHAFOOR and 6 others Petitioners Versus ABDUL HAQUE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 17th August, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of Lahore High Court, dated 19‑12‑1983 passed in Civil Revision No.368 of 1977). ‑‑‑S.10‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑Division of property by Settlement Authorities‑‑Transferring Authority had not only made portions of the house but also indicated it on the plan showing the share/portion of each transferee‑‑Conclusions drawn in the Settlement hierarchy and m the Civil Court, held, were not open to exception in circumstances‑‑Leave to appeal against order of High Court was refused.
Judgment & Decree
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑The petitioner, a transferee of a portion of the house No. S‑4, Block 22, Sargodha, instituted a civil suit claiming that the staircase fell within the share or portion of the property transferred to him. His suit, his appeal and his Revision failed. He, therefore, seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 18‑12‑1983 by which the Revision was dismissed. The transferring authority has not only made portions of the house but also indicated it on a plan showing the share/portion of each transferee. The staircase was taken to be a part of the portion transferred to the respondent, the reasoning of the High Court being as follows:‑ "The approach to the staircase was through the dehwari which was transferred to the respondent. Therefore, normally it was the respondent who could be considered to be entitled to use and own the staircase Again in the revision petition (copy exh.D6) filed by the late Abdullah against the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner to the Additional Settlement Commissioner he made grievance of the fact that the staircase in dispute had not been transferred to him and prayed for its transfer in his favour. His revision petition was dismissed indicating that the Settlement Authorities endorsed its transfer in the respondent's favour." The learned counsel for the Petitioner has not been able to show as to how the conclusions drawn in the Settlement hierarchy and in the Civil Courts are open to exception. No case is made out and leave to appeal is refused. M.B.A./A‑484/S Petition dismissed