1984 PLP 271 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus FEDERAL LAND COMMISSIONER, RAWALPINDI and 5 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1984 PLP 271 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Haider Ali Pirzada, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus FEDERAL LAND COMMISSIONER, RAWALPINDI and 5 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 (M. L. R 115) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 PLP 271 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 (M. L. R 115) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1984 PLP 271 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Haider Ali Pirzada, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 PLP 271 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus FEDERAL LAND COMMISSIONER, RAWALPINDI and 5 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- K . A . Wahab for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 10th April, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
Para. 25--Gift--Natural justice, principles of--Land gifted by father of petitioner in his favour declared invalid without notice to petitioner- Order passed, held, in violation of principles of natural justice and set aside--Case remanded for decision afresh after notice to petitioner- [Natural justice, principles of].
Judgment & Decree
Para. 25--Gift--Natural justice, principles of--Land gifted by father of petitioner in his favour declared invalid without notice to petitioner- Order passed, held, in violation of principles of natural justice and set aside--Case remanded for decision afresh after notice to petitioner- [Natural justice, principles of]. K . A . Wahab for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 10th April, 1984. AJMAL MIAN, J.--The petitioner in this petition has impugned the order dated 28-12-1976 passed by respondent No.2 invalidating the gift in his favour effected by his father respondent No.6. The brief facts leading to the filing of the above petition are that respondent No.6 had effected gift of the suit land in favour of the petitioner on 26-9-1971. After the enforcement of M.L.R. 115, respondent No.6 filed a declaration, which was scrutinized by the Land Commissioner, Sind, who by his order dated 7-8-1972 declared the above gift as valid. It seems that respondent No.2 in exercise of Suo Motu revisional power by his impugned order dated 28-12-1976 declared the above gift as in valid inter alia on the ground that since revenue receipts in the name of respondent No.6 and as it was not proved that the physical possession of the land was given to the petitioner, the gift was not valid.
2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the above impugned order has been passed without any prior notice to him. The respondent department has chosen not to contest the above petition as nobody has turned up on behalf of the respondent. There is no denial from the side of the respondents to the petitioner's averment that no notice was served on the petitioner, prior to the passing of the impugned order. In this view of the matter, there has been violation of the principle of natural justice, and, therefore, we allow the above petition and declare the impugned order as being without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The respondents are restrained from acting or enforcing the same. However, we remand the case to the Federal Land Commission with the direction to decide the matter afresh after notice to the petitioner. M. A. K. Case remanded.