1991 PLP 367 (SCMR)
Mst. REHMAT BIBI and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ALI and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 367 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Shakurul Salam and Rustam S. Sidhwa, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. REHMAT BIBI and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ALI and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 367 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 367 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Shakurul Salam and Rustam S. Sidhwa, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 367 (SCMR) (Mst. REHMAT BIBI and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ALI and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. M. Z. Khalil, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 31st January, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 19-9-1987 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in W.P. No. 107-R of 1986).
S. 10
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Petitioner did not formerly apply for transfer of property in dispute on the basis that she was in possession thereof, rather, she challenged transfer made in favour of respondent on ground that property could not be treated as evacuee property as it had not been treated as such prior to 1-1-1957
Since petitioner did not apply formerly for transfer of property in dispute which was in her possession, in her name, her claim, held, was rightly rejected
Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J.‑‑‑This is a petition filed by Mst. Rehmat Bibi and other petitioners, seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 19‑9‑1987. ,
2. The petitioner, who alleges to be the occupant of the first floor of the disputed house, claims the said portion as residual property against Muhammad Ali respondent, who had been transferred the whole house by the Deputy Administrator (R.P.) under his order dated 26‑8‑1984 on the basis of his possession. The petitioner did not formerly apply for the transfer of the property in her name on the basis that she was in possession. Rather, she challenged the transfer made in favour of respondent No.1 on the ground that the property could not be treated as evacuee property as it had not been treated as such prior to 1 1‑1957. Since the petitioner did not formerly apply for the transfer of the property which was in her possession, in her name, her claim was rightly rejected. There being no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed. H.B.T./R‑152/S Petition dismissed.