Home Maxims & Terms Composite Property meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Composite Property

Composite Property legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

1986 SCMR 437 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Art. 185(3)Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 10Settlement Scheme No. VIIITransfer of propertyComposite propertyDividing of shop transferred to petitioner and house portion ordered to be disposed of in accordance with relevant law

House transferred to respondent on basis of his N.C.H. Form-Order impugned on ground that petitioner was not heard in connection with disposal of N . C . H . Form filed by respondent

Petitioner being a claimant displaced person having already obtained a house as well as a commercial unit, held, was not entitled to get a second house

Order of Settlement authorities being just and fair, was unexceptionable in circumstances

Leave to appeal refused.

1985 SCMR 122 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
Art. 185(3)Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S.10Composite propertyTransfer of portion out of such property in 1962 to petitioner

Other unit transferred to respondent/could not be further divided in 1972 so as either to exclude from it a staircase or a terrace which formed integral part of that unit

Such order unit had become an independent unit and separate property since 1962

Petitioner had no locus standi to challenge transfer of that independent unit to respondent whether in part or as a whole-Order passed by Settlement authorities further dividing such other independent unit was without lawful authority and has rightly been set aside by High Court

Petition for leave to appeal dismissed.

[Locus standi].

1982 SCMR 1093 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 2(12)-Composite property-Allotment - Property a composite property - Order of Settlement authority transferring shops to their occupants obviously passed under S. 2(12) of Act XXVIII of 1958-Order of transfer thus passed held, not open to exception.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Composite Property", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/15070

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Composite Property"

SCMR 1983
Civil Appeal No. 33 of 1977, decided on 24th May, 1982.

1983 S C M R 438

IQBAL MUHAMMAD AND Others-Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ILYAS AND Others-Respondents

Court: --S. 2-Scope of-Section 2, held, intended to cover not only com petency but also other forms of defects arising from improper exercise of powers of Chief Settlement Commissioner.-Interpretation of statutes.
SCMR 1983
Civil petition) No, 650 of 1976, decided on 14th March, 1983:

1983 S C M R 1040

N/A

Court: High Court
PLD 1964
Letters Patent Appeal No. 424 of 1963, decided on 4th February 19 4.

P L D 1964 (W

Haji MUHAMMAD HANIF‑Appellant Versus CHIEF SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXYIII of 1958), S. 2(12) Proviso Second‑Composite property consisting of residential and business units‑Each unit may be disposed of separately, even if there is only one applicant, unless Chief Settlement Commissioner declares whole or a part of property as one property‑Rehmat Ullah v. Deputy Settlement Com missioner P L D 1963 S C 633 ref. and Jalil Ahmed v. Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner P L D 1962 Kar. 19dissented from.
SCMR 1985
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 1101 of 1980, decided on 16th August, 1984.

1985 S C M R 122

Sheikh Muhammad Hussain — Petitioner Versus KAMAL DIN and another — Respondents

Court: ---Art. 185(3)--Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S.10--Composite property--Transfer of portion out of such property in 1962 to petitioner--Other unit transferred to respondent/could not be further divided in 1972 so as either to exclude from it a staircase or a terrace which formed integral part of that unit--Such order unit had become an independent unit and separate property since 1962--Petitioner had no locus standi to challenge transfer of that independent unit to respondent whether in part or as a whole- Order passed by Settlement authorities further dividing such other independent unit was without lawful authority and has rightly been set aside by High Court--Petition for leave to appeal dismissed.--Locus standi.
PLD 1973
Letters Patent Appeal No. 381 of 1964, decided on 29th September 1971.

P L D 1973 Lahore 250

DR. FAIZ MUHAMMAD‑Appellant Versus THE CHIEF SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, LAHORE‑Respondent

Court:
SCMR 1985
Civil Petition No. 1091 of 1980, decided on 16th August, 1984.

1985 S C M R 1267

RAZA MUHAMMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER and others‑‑Respondents

Court: High Court
MLD 1995
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1062 of 1966, decided on 20th October, 1994.

1995 M L D 956

JAN MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, SARGODHA

Court: Lahore
MLD 1995
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1062 of 1966, decided on 20th October, 1994.

1995 M L D 1491

JAN MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, SARGODHA DIVISION, SARGODHA‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Lahore
SCMR 1986
Civil Appeal No. K‑52 of 1981, decided on 4th September,1985.

1986 S C M R 160

GHULAM RASOOL‑‑Appellant Versus SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, KARACHI and another‑‑Respondents

Court: High Court
SCMR 1985
Civil Petition No. 56 of 1981, decided on 21st August, 1984.

1985 S C M R 1259

MUHAMMAD ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus RIZWAN HUSSAIN and others‑‑Respondents

Court: High Court