SCMR 1994

1994 PLP 510 (SCMR)

of Minority Affairs, Islamabad and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus KHURSHID ZAMAN KHAN and 13 others‑‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 780‑L of 1992, decided on 23rd November, 1993.
Honorable Judges
Shafiur Rahman and Saleem Akhtar, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1994 PLP 510 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Shafiur Rahman and Saleem Akhtar, JJ
Parties of Minority Affairs, Islamabad and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus KHURSHID ZAMAN KHAN and 13 others‑‑‑Respondents
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 510 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 510 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman and Saleem Akhtar, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 510 (SCMR) (of Minority Affairs, Islamabad and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus KHURSHID ZAMAN KHAN and 13 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑

Representation

  • Ch. Fazal‑e‑Hussain, Advocate and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
  • Syed Iftikhar Ahmad, Advocate and MA. Qureshi, Advocate‑on- Record for Respondents Nos.l to 3.
  • Syed Muhammad Zainul Abidin, Advocate and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos.7 to 14.
  • Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1993.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 4‑5‑1992 passed in W.P. No. 948‑R/1977). ‑‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to examine, inter alia, whether some of the determinative orders having not been objected to or appealed against, had not attained finality. Samad Khan v. Khalid Khan 1985 SCMR 770 and Muhammad Swaleh v. United Grain and Fodder Agencies PLD 1964 SC 97 rel. Ch. Jalal v. Board of Revenue Sindh 1982 CLC 2020 ref.,

Judgment & Decree

Samad Khan v. Khalid Khan 1985 SCMR 770 and Muhammad Swaleh v. United Grain and Fodder Agencies PLD 1964 SC 97 rel. Ch. Jalal v. Board of Revenue Sindh 1982 CLC 2020 ref., Ch. Fazal‑e‑Hussain, Advocate and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Syed Iftikhar Ahmad, Advocate and MA. Qureshi, Advocate‑on- Record for Respondents Nos.l to

3. Syed Muhammad Zainul Abidin, Advocate and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos.7 to

14. Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1993. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J: ‑‑Leave to appeal is granted to examine, inter alia, whether some of the determinative orders having not been objected to or appealed against, had not attained finality. Reliance is placed on Samad Khan v. Khalid Khan (1985 SCMR 770) and Muhammad Swaleh v. United Grain & Fodder Agencies (PLD 1964 SC 97).

2. As for powers of suo motu revision even in presence of a time‑barred application by a party to the proceedings, reliance is placed on Ch. Jalal v. Board of Revenue, Sindh (1982 CLC 2020).

3. No alienation, damage or depreciation in value of the disputed property meanwhile. AA./F‑284/S Leave granted.