1990 PLP 1971 (CLC)
DAN KHAN for Residents of Village‑‑Petitioner Versus CHIRAGH BIBI and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 1971 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Board of Revenue Punjab |
| Bench Members | Syed Sarfraz Hussain, Member (Consolidation) |
| Parties | DAN KHAN for Residents of Village‑‑Petitioner Versus CHIRAGH BIBI and others‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 1971 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 1971 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Board of Revenue Punjab bench comprising: Syed Sarfraz Hussain, Member (Consolidation).
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 1971 (CLC) (DAN KHAN for Residents of Village‑‑Petitioner Versus CHIRAGH BIBI and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Wali Muhammad for Petitioner.
- Hamid Asghar Sheikh for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act (XI of 1957) ‑‑‑S. 7‑‑‑Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of‑‑‑Authority below after thrashing out case very minutely found that it had been established without any shadow of doubt that petitioner was not a right holder of village in dispute, but was a right holder of village adjoining to it and as such had no locus standi to claim path from disputed village‑‑‑Such findings of fact recorded by Authority below, held, could not be interfered with in revision.
Judgment & Decree
West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act (XI of 1957) ‑‑‑S. 7‑‑‑Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of‑‑‑Authority below after thrashing out case very minutely found that it had been established without any shadow of doubt that petitioner was not a right holder of village in dispute, but was a right holder of village adjoining to it and as such had no locus standi to claim path from disputed village‑‑‑Such findings of fact recorded by Authority below, held, could not be interfered with in revision. Ch. Wali Muhammad for Petitioner. Hamid Asghar Sheikh for Respondents. This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 11‑4‑1988 of the Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) whereby appeal filed by the respondents was accepted.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have examined the record of the case. The learned Additional Commissioner (Consolidation) has already thrashed out the case very minutely and the impugned order does not call for interference as it is established without any shadow of doubt that Dan Khan petitioner is not a right holder of village Nangli Bajwa. He is a right holder of adjoining village Saidoke, Tehsil Narowal. As such he does not come within the ambit of an‑aggrieved person in Nangli Bajwa estate and therefore has no locus standi to claim path from that village. The Collector (Consolidation), had wrongly provided a path to the petitioner whereas the Additional Commissioner (Consolidation), has rightly set aside the Collector's order dated 20‑9‑1987 being void ab initio. In these circumstances, the petitioner has no case. The revision petition being without force is dismissed accordingly. H.B.T./347/R Revision dismissed'