Home Maxims & Terms Mule-Breeding Grant meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Mule-Breeding Grant

Mule-Breeding Grant legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

1959 PLD 39 WEST-PAKISTAN-BOARD-OF-REVENUE Judicial Precedent
Mule-Breeding Grant breeding grantDemise of tenant-Disposal of grant to be made in accordance with clause 25 of 1942 Statement

Direction contained in letter issued by Government in February 1952 is not inconsistent with discretion contained in clause 25 of 1942 Statement -Duty of Collector, stated.

1956 PLD 48 WEST-PAKISTAN-BOARD-OF-REVENUE Judicial Precedent
Mule-Breeding Grantbreeding grant -Sucreuion to

To be ordinarily decided on recommendation of District Remount Officer-Rule of primogeniture not applicable.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Mule-Breeding Grant", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/21889

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Mule-Breeding Grant"

PLD 1959
Revision Side No. 144 of 1956‑57, decided on 27th June 1957. District Montgomery.

P L D 1959 W

KHATUN‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others‑Respondents

Court:
PLD 1956
Appeal Side No. 159 of 1956 decided on 18th May, 1956, District Montgomery.

P L D (Rev

MUHAMMAD ALI *SHAH‑Petitioner Versus FIDDA HUSSAIN SHAH‑Respondent

Court:
CLC 2005
1979-December-17

2005 C L C 1590

BASHIR AHMAD and others — Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE (COLONIES), and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 1976
Civil Appeal No. 55 of 1975, decided on 30th April 1976.

P L D 1976 Supreme Court 435

Sub. MUHAMMAD ASGHAR‑Appellant Versus Mst. SAFIA BEGUM AND ANOTHER‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑ S. 10(3) and Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98‑Allotment of horse/mule breeding grant‑Writ jurisdiction‑Collector, subject to control of Board of Revenue‑Vested with descretion to allot remount breeding tenancy‑High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Art. 98 ‑‑ Not justified in interfering with discharge of functions entrusted to Collector under law‑Court or tribunal, having jurisdic tion, determining a question‑Cannot be said to have acted illegally or with material irregularity merely for reason of having come to an erroneous decision on a question of fact or even of law‑Constitutional provision of Art. 98‑Not designed to empower High Court to inter fere with decision of Court or tribunal of inferior jurisdiction merely because of decision being wrong in its opinion.‑Writ.
CLC 1995
Civil Revision No. 1287 of 1991, decided on 13th June, 1993.

1995 C L C 408

ABDUL LATIF‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PUNJAB PROVINCE and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
MLD 1993
N/A

1993 M L D 1905

BAKHSH — Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Collector,

Court: Lahore
CLC 1995
Writ Petition No. 14700 of 1994, decided on 13th December, 1994.

1995 C L C 838

MUNIR AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SECRETARY (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 1973
Writ Petition No. 1392 of 1971, decided on 30th March 1973.

P L D 1973 Lahore 726

SAVA BEGUM‑Petitioner Versus THE BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE AND ANOTHER‑‑Respondents

Court:
MLD 2000
Writ Petition No.291 of 1992, heard on 9th March, 1998.

2000 M L D 1097

MANZOOR‑AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ZAFAR IQBAL and others‑‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
YLR 2011
Writ Petition No.6074 of 2011, decided on 6th July, 2011.

2011 Y L R 3079

QAMAR-UZ-ZAMAN-Petitioner Versus MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB (JUDICIAL-IV) and 3 others —

Court: Lahore