1973 PLP 233 (SCMR)
ABDUL KARIM MODS A‑Petitioner Versus MOHINI BAI AND OTHERS‑Respondents
| Citation | 1973 PLP 233 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ABDUL KARIM MODS A‑Petitioner Versus MOHINI BAI AND OTHERS‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1973 PLP 233 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1973 PLP 233 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1973 PLP 233 (SCMR) (ABDUL KARIM MODS A‑Petitioner Versus MOHINI BAI AND OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Shafi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Nathulal J. Bhambhani, Advocate with him) (absent) instructed by Muzafar Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 28th March 1973.
Headnotes / Summary
(On review from the judgment and order of the Supreme Court, dated the 22nd November 1972, in Civil Petition No. K‑82 of 1972). Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XLVII, r. 1‑Review Question sought to be reconsidered‑Authoritative decision of Court already existing on point‑No error apparent on face of record -Review petition dismissed. Devachand Muljimal v. The Deputy Settlement & Rehabilitation Commissioner, Karachi and others P L D 1965 S C 356 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Devachand Muljimal v. The Deputy Settlement & Rehabilitation Commissioner, Karachi and others P L D 1965 S C 356 ref. Muhammad Shafi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Nathulal J. Bhambhani, Advocate with him) (absent) instructed by Muzafar Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing : 28th March 1973. WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.‑This is an application for review against the order of this Court in Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K‑82 of 1972, dated the 22nd November 1972. By this order, the petition was dismissed. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the view of this Court that the property in dispute has become non -evacuee property as it has been acquired by the Government under section 4 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement Act, 1958, requires reconsideration. This point was considered by this Court in the case of Devachand Muljimal v. The Deputy Settlement & Rehabilitation Commissioner, Karachi and others (P L D 1965 S C 356). There is thus an authoritative decision on this point and the question does not require reconsideration. The ground taken by the petitioner is not covered by Order XLVII, rule 1, C. P. C. There is no error apparent on the face of the record. There is no ground to review. The review petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.