Divisible property
Divisible property legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
S. 2(12)-Divisible property - Allotment - High Court's remand order challenged on ground that decision of Settlement authority on question whether property divisible or not and whether portions in dispute formed integral part of main house being questions of fact could not be interfered with by High Court-Held: Petitioners cannot agitate against order passed in writ petition for reason of no petition for leave to appeal having been filed against orders passed thereon accepting petition filed by respondents and remanding case back to Settlement Commissioner for fresh consideration - Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3).- [Question of fact].
"Divisible property", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/15068
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Divisible property"
1976 S C M R 11
Ch. MUHAMMAD ASGHAR‑Appellant Versus THE SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION
Court: High Court1997 M L D 2454
IMAM ALI through Legal Heirs‑‑‑Applicant Versus Mst. CHAND BIBI through Legal Heirs and another‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Karachi1982 S C M R 1093
QAZI SADIQ HUSSAIN AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus UMAR DIN AND OTHERS-Respondents
Court: -- S. 2(12)-Divisible property - Allotment - High Court's remand order challenged on ground that decision of Settlement authority on question whether property divisible or not and whether portions in dispute formed integral part of main house being questions of fact could not be interfered with by High Court-Held: Petitioners cannot agitate against order passed in writ petition for reason of no petition for leave to appeal having been filed against orders passed thereon accepting petition filed by respondents and remanding case back to Settlement Commissioner for fresh consideration - Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3).- Question of fact.1999 CLC 325
ZAHEER‑UD‑DIN AZHAR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (REVENUE)
Court: Lahore1999S999
MUKHTAR AHMED and others — Appellants Versus THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (CONS.)/SETTLEMENT
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan2002 Y L R 2723
Raja AJAIB KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Soofi ALLAH DITTA and 4 others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Lahore2006 S C M R 755
SALEEM MUMTAZ SYED and others — Petitioners Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (REVENUE), LAHORE DIVISION and others — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan2014 Y L R 2571
MUHAMMAD QAHIR SHAH and others — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, through Secretary, Islamabad and others — Respondents
Court: Balochistan1974 S C M R 49
Mst. SABRA AND OTHERS‑‑Petitioners Versus FAZAL HAQ AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 1981 Lahore 766
Syed TAHIR HUSSAIN MASHHADI‑Appellant Versus Syed NAZAR ABBAS MASHHADI AND ANOTHER — Respondents
Court: ‑‑ Para. 10‑Divisibility of property‑Order of Settlement Commis sioner showing that he was fully conscious of appeal being time‑barred and after giving his anxious consideration to question of limitation, declaring property as divisible into two independent portions‑Held, such order cannot be taken exception to on ground of Settlement Commissioner having not dealt with question of limitation‑Syed Azmat Ali v. The Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner, Lahore and others P L D 1964 S C 260 held not applicable.