Settlement Scheme No. III

Building or premises declared under Para.16 of the Schedule, Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958 as big mansion or hotel, could not be considered as "business premises" or "shop"

Principles.

Entire shop having been transferred, transferee was entitled to claim that the roof of the shop in question, also stood transferred to him.

Settlement authority having failed to verify the amount of compensation books, delay in the adjustment of entire bid money thus occurred due to negligence on the part of Settlement Authorities

Settlement Authorities having not cancelled the auction proceedings and having allowed further time to auction-purchasers to make payment of the bid money as also the fact that the fault lay more on the shoulders of Settlement Authorities, property!, in question was not available for transfer to third party.

Leave to appeal granted to consider true interpretation of paras.18, 19 & 20 of Chaps. VII & VIII of Settlement Scheme No.III.

Merely because an inquiry was pending on petitioner's application, held, would not clothe petitioner with a right to transfer of property and thereby petitioner could not acquire, locus standi to file constitutional petition to challenge transfer of property to any other person

When any such inquiry was pending on application of petitioner, it would, held further, be improper for Court to take over the matter and adjudicate same dispute in constitutional jurisdiction.

[Locus standi].

Para. 22-Words "will be extinguished" -Not words of automatic operation-To achieve result thereby intended, action was necessary to be taken or order passed by competent authority.

Big mansions, transfer of-Only bid accepted being one made by purchasers, 42 in number-All such purchasers having backed out of deal, property, a big mansion, held, could not be transferred to persons other than those whose bid accepted.

S. 29 read with Settlement Scheme No. III, paras. 18, 19 & 20 and Chief Settlement Commoner's Memo. No. 709-P.A-SC(P)/:1~2 dated 13-10-1962 and 2580-P1L/67-1P, dated 26-7-67-Ejectrnent-Auction-purchaser paying up full price after acceptance of his bid-Entitled to possession of property and issuance of Permanent Transfer Deed in his favour and to full proprietary rights in property on its transfer to him-Section 29, held, not applicable to such cases-Permanent Transfer Deed not issued-Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner could yet eject persons concerned but physical ejectment of unauthorised occupants from "house" prohibited. [Per Muhammad Afzal Cheema

S. 13 read with Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 30 and Settlement Scheme No. III, Ch IV, para. 10 & para. 19(b) of Terms and Conditions of Auction-Contention that person purchasing big mansion at auction under Settlement Scheme No. III could get only P. T. D. and not a P. T. O. and any person holding P. T. O. in respect of such property could not be a landlord for purpose of S. 30 of Act XXVIII of 1958 and no ejectment application under Ordinance VI of 1959 competent-Held : where payment of full purchase price deferred, a P. T. O. could validly be issued and he would be a landlord within meaning of S. 30 of Act XXVIII of 1958 and for purpose of ejectment application under Ordinance VI of 1959.

S. 30 read with First Sched., para. 15 and Settlement Scheme No. III, paras. 10, 11, 12, 19(b) & 20(b)Big mansion-Transfer of-Notice-Ejectment-Purchaser of big mansion required to pay price of building within specified time in lump sum and not in installments

Cannot be given possession until full price paid-Nor can provisional transfer order be issued until full price and settlement fees paid-Such purchaser could deal with occupant of property as his statutory tenant and sue or his ejectment only when property stood permanently transferred to him on date notice under S. 30 was given.

Rules laid down ill Settlement Scheme No. I do not mutatis mutandis apply to Settlement Scheme No. III.

Settlement Scheme No. 111, Terms and Conditions para. 9-Claimant making highest offer at auction failing to produce document mentioned in sub para (1) of para. 9-Confiscation of earnest money valid and proper.