1985 PLP 573 (SCMR)
ABDULLAH SHAUKAT — Petitioner Versus ALLAH BAKHSH and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP 573 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, Shafiur Rahman and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ |
| Parties | ABDULLAH SHAUKAT — Petitioner Versus ALLAH BAKHSH and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 573 (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 573 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Shafiur Rahman and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 573 (SCMR) (ABDULLAH SHAUKAT — Petitioner Versus ALLAH BAKHSH and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Khalilur Rahman, Slenior Advocate Supreme Court assisted by Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Mehdi Khan for Advocate-on-Record for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
- 0Mr. Niaz Muhammad Siddiqui, Advocate Supreme Court and Mr. S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents Nos. 3 and 4.
- Date of hearing: 13th August, 1984.
- Ch. Khalilur Rahman, Slenior Advocate Supreme Court assisted by Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Mehdi Khan for Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
- 0Mr. Niaz Muhammad Siddiqui, Advocate Supreme Court and Mr. S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos. 3 and 4.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 30-1-1984 in W.P. No. 926 of 1971).
Art. 185(3)--Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S.67--Punjab Redemption and Restitution of Mortgaged Lands Act (XIX of 1964), Ss. 10 & 11--Leave to appeal granted to examine (i) whether principle of acknowledgment was correctly applied to a case where there was no signed instrument of acknowledgment; (ii) whether S. 67, Transfer of Property Act affected jurisdiction of Revenue Officer in Punjab; and (iii) whether in view of Custodians intervening interest in property, an application under Ss. 10 & 11, Redemption of Mortgaged Lands Act, 1964 was competent.
Judgment & Decree
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑ Leave to appeal is granted to examine, inter alia:‑ (i) Whether principle of acknowledgment was correctly applied to a case where there was no signed instrument of acknowledgment. (ii) Whether section 67, Transfer of Property Act affected the jurisdiction of Revenue Officer in Punjab. (iii) Whether in view of the Custodian's intervening interest in the property, an application under sections 10 and 11, Redemption of Mortgaged Lands Act, 1964 was competent. Security Rs.1,