Home Maxims & Terms Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme

Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2005 PLD 641 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Para. 46

Inheritance in case of non-confirmed allottee to be governed by para. 46 of Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme.

2001 YLR 1289 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement SchemePara. 46Non-confirmed allotteeInheritanceJurisdiction of Civil CourtPlaintiffs claimed to be the owner of the suit land on the basis of inheritance of the no confirmed allotteeTrial Court dismissed the suit for want of jurisdiction whereas Appellate Court allowed the appeal and decreed the suitValidity

Inheritance, in the case of non-confirmed allottee would be governed by para. 46 of Punjab Rehabilitation and Settlement Scheme and the question of inheritance was not open to be agitated before the Civil Court

Predecessor of the parties died even before the allotment of the land

Where the inheritance mutation was attested in the year 1954, and further appeals and proceedings were in continuation of the same, Civil Court had no jurisdiction in the matter

Judgment and decree passed by Appellate Court were set aside and that of the Trial Court were restored.

1982 SCMR 549 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Art. 98 and Pakistan Rehabilitation Act (XLII of 1956), S. 13 read with Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme, para. 67-Writ proceedings-Relief, held, must be confined to prayer made in writ petition and High Court cannot issue a writ suo motu-(Writ].

1973 PLD 215 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme No. 52, paras. 1, cls. (viii), 9(a) & 23 read with West Pakistan Rehabilitation Scheme No. 56, para. 4(a)

Provisions of para. 4(a), Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme No. 56-Not retrospective-Cannot operate retrospectively against allotments made earlier under Punjab Rehabilitation Scheme No. 52-Land allotted on temporary basis to Jammu and Kashmir refugees in lieu of maintenance-Not excluded from allotment under Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme No. 52-Allotment in lieu of maintenance to Jammu and Kashmir refugees-Not a "temporary allotment" in terms of para. I(viii) and hence does not enjoy benefit of para. 9(a) or 23 of Punjab Rehabilitation and Settlement Scheme No. 52.

1966 PLD 723 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 4 & 14 read wish Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme, 1952, Chap. II, Part I, paras. 8 & 8-A-Allotment of land to mortgagor displaced person under para. 8 of Scheme subject to payment of mortgage money "which may subsequently be determined"-Mortgage money, however, remaining undetermined until land acquired under S. 4-Basis for such determination of mortgage money can be fixed only by a scheme made by Chief Settlement Commissioner under S. 14-Making of a provision like para. 8-A of Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme within lawful authority of Chief Settlement Commissioner-No valid exception can be taken to exercise of that power

Pakistan Rehabilitation Ordinance (XIX of 1948), S. 7 Pakistan Rehabilitation Act (XL1I of 1958), S. 6 (1) read with West Pakistan Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme, 1956, Chap. II, Part I, paras. 8 & 8-A.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/14968

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Punjab Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme"

PLD 1973
Settlement Revision No. 273 of 1970, decided on 1st December 1971.

P L D 1973 Lahore 215

ALLAH DITTA AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus Raja SAEED AKHTAR‑Respondent

Court:
PLD 1977
Letters Patent Appeal No. 852 of 1966, heard on 29th November 1974.

P L D 1977 Lahore 747

MUHAMMAD KHAN AND 2 OTHERS-Appellants Versus KARIM BAKHSH AND 2 OTHERS-Respondents

Court:
PLD 2005
N/A

P L D 2005 Lahore 641

Mst. FATIMA BEGUM and another — Petitioners Versus KHUSH NASEEB KHAN and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 1966
4th April 1966

P L D 1966 (W

AHSANULLAH KHAN‑Petitioner Versus CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, WEST PAKISTAN‑Respondent

Court: High Court
SCMR 1982
Civil Appeal No. 108/8 in Civil Petition No. 39 of 1976, decided on 22nd March, 1981.

1982 S C M R 549

AKHTAR ABBAS AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus NAYYAR HUSSAIN-Respondent

Court: High Court
PLD 1966
Writ Petition No. 1493/R of 1962, decided on 29th November 1965.

P L D 1966 (W

MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN‑ — Petitioner Versus (1) CHIEF SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, AND

Court: (c) West Pakistan Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme, 1957, para. 42‑Urban land entered in revenue records as "sakni" (residen tial) from before 1947, and got entered "fraudulently" as "baram" and "chahi" in 1960‑61; land having a building on it; and assessed to Property and House taxes‑Cannot be allotted as agricultural land under paragraph 42 aforesaid, but as "house" under Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 2 (4) read with Schedule, para. 1‑Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958), S. 2 (3)‑Definition of "land"‑Supplementary Scheme No. 2, paras; 3, 5.
PLD 1980
Civil Appeal No. 60 of 1975, decided on 27th February, 1980.

P L D 1980 Supreme Court 76 Present : Muhammad Haleem and G

ZAFARULLAH AND 23 OTHERS-Appellants Versus MUHAMMAD SIDDIQ AND OTHERS-Respondents

Court: 5. 20-Review-Order passed by Rehabilitation Commissioner never challenged before any forum including High Court-Settlement Commissioner devoid of jurisdiction to sit in review over such order Settlement Commissioner even if supposed to have such jurisdiction, held, could not, without condoning delay of more than a decade suffered by revision application filed before him. set aside order of Rehabilitation Commissioner.-Review-Delay.
PLD 1964
Revision No. 1642 of 1962‑63, decided on 19th November 1963, District Bahawalnagar.

P L D

SULLMAN AND OTHERS‑ — Petitioners Versus KHUSHI MUHAMMAD‑ — Respondent

Court:
SCMR 1993
Civil Appeal No. 211 of 1981, decided on 13th May, 1990.

1992 S C M R 1365

WALI MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD SHAFI and another‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLD 1968
Custom (Punjab)‑---Widow‑Nature of widow's estate‑Widow "owner" of her life‑estate‑Reversioners have no right or interest in praesenti in property held by widow as a life‑tenure‑Punjab Refugees (Registration of Land Claims) Act (V of 1949), S. 4 Widow registering a claim under Act (V of 1949) does so as an owner, within purview. of para. 2, Chap. 11, Part I, Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme, "in her own right", and not on behalf of reversioners‑Becomes vested with heritable and transferable right on confirmation of her allotment‑Collaterals of last male owner have no control on her power of disposition or have a right to succession‑Widow is entitled to permanent settlement, under Ss. 15 & 16, Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958), of land confirmed to her, and is competent to alienate same‑Is succeeded by her own personal heirs and not by heirs of last male owner‑Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme (Punjab), Part 11, para. 46‑A not applicable to her‑Memo. No. 4539‑65/1964‑R(L), dated 14‑4‑1966 from Deputy Secretary (Rural) to Chief Settlement Commissioner does not embody a "condition" of grant of land [Mst. Kauri v. Jamiat Singh 34 P R 1893 ; Mst. Durgo v. Prem Singh A I R 1924 Lah. 196 and Mst. Fateh Nishan v. Ahmad Shah AI R 1914 Lah. 414 dissented from].

P L D 1968 Lahore 234

SHER MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus THE ADDITIONAL REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER,

Court: Custom (Punjab)‑---Widow‑Nature of widow's estate‑Widow "owner" of her life‑estate‑Reversioners have no right or interest in praesenti in property held by widow as a life‑tenure‑Punjab Refugees (Registration of Land Claims) Act (V of 1949), S. 4 Widow registering a claim under Act (V of 1949) does so as an owner, within purview. of para. 2, Chap. 11, Part I, Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme, "in her own right", and not on behalf of reversioners‑Becomes vested with heritable and transferable right on confirmation of her allotment‑Collaterals of last male owner have no control on her power of disposition or have a right to succession‑Widow is entitled to permanent settlement, under Ss. 15 & 16, Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958), of land confirmed to her, and is competent to alienate same‑Is succeeded by her own personal heirs and not by heirs of last male owner‑Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme (Punjab), Part 11, para. 46‑A not applicable to her‑Memo. No. 4539‑65/1964‑R(L), dated 14‑4‑1966 from Deputy Secretary (Rural) to Chief Settlement Commissioner does not embody a "condition" of grant of land Mst. Kauri v. Jamiat Singh 34 P R 1893 ; Mst. Durgo v. Prem Singh A I R 1924 Lah. 196 and Mst. Fateh Nishan v. Ahmad Shah AI R 1914 Lah. 414 dissented from.