1990 PLP 744 (SCMR)
GHULAM RASUL and 5 others‑‑Petitioners Versus JANNAT BIBI and 11 others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 744 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM RASUL and 5 others‑‑Petitioners Versus JANNAT BIBI and 11 others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 744 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 744 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 744 (SCMR) (GHULAM RASUL and 5 others‑‑Petitioners Versus JANNAT BIBI and 11 others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Hamid‑ud‑Din, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 30th October, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 1‑11‑1986, passed in C.R. No.1523‑B of 1986). ‑‑‑S.25‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Jurisdiction of Civil Courts‑‑‑Civil Courts having not been vested with jurisdiction to correct orders passed by Settlement Authorities which had attained finality, orders of Appellate Court below setting aside judgment and decree passed by Trial Court in an incompetent suit filed to challenge order of Settlement Authority, held, was rightly upheld by High Court‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S.25‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Jurisdiction of Civil Courts‑‑‑Civil Courts having not been vested with jurisdiction to correct orders passed by Settlement Authorities which had attained finality, orders of Appellate Court below setting aside judgment and decree passed by Trial Court in an incompetent suit filed to challenge order of Settlement Authority, held, was rightly upheld by High Court‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. Ch. Hamid‑ud‑Din, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 30th October, 1989. S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J: ‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by the petitioners against the order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court who vide impugned judgment, dismissed the civil revision filed by the petitioners against the judgment of the District Judge, Faisalabad, who while accepting the appeal filed by the respondents, set aside the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Faisalabad in favour of the present petitioners on 7‑5‑1985, regarding the disputed property, the detailed facts of which are given in the plaint. Primarily, the suit was barred by provisions of the special law governing such transfer and thus the suit property transferred to Hakim Ali and after the issuance of P.T.O. and P.T.D. in his name the last order passed on 24‑9‑1957 by the Settlement Authorities shall be deemed. final. Even under section 25 of the said Act, the Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to correct the orders of the Settlement Authority which ended in finality. The suit of the plaintiffs/petitioners was incompetent and therefore, the order passed by the appellate Court has rightly been upheld by the High Court. The petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./G‑258/S Petition dismissed.