Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 557 2012 SLD 557 2012 CLC 985
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petitions Nos.389 of 2007 and D-84 of 2009, decision dated: 22-02-2012
SHAHID ANWAR BAJWA AND MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

ABID ALI BAIG

VS

ZAFFAR ALI and 5 others

Law: West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act, (XI of 1957)

Section: 8(1)

Law: West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act, (XI of 1957)

Section: 8(1)

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XLVII,R.1

West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act (XI of 1957)-------S. 8---Review of orders by the Provincial Board of Revenue----Scope---Section 8 of West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act, 1957, had empowered a person aggrieved by a decree or order passed by the Board of Revenue, and who from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which after the exercise of due diligence was not within his knowledge; or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or the order was made; or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record; or for any other sufficient reason, could apply for a review---Special provision of S.8 of West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act, 1957 was introduced to provide additional remedy to an aggrieved person to move for review on discovery of new and important matter or evidence, which could not have been produced by him at the time when earlier order was passed---Powers of review of Board of Revenue, were very limited and could be invoked only for specific points, namely discovery of new and important matter for evidence, which after exercise of due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the petitioner; or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or order was made; on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of record; or for any other sufficient reasons---If power of review was exercised by the Board of Revenue for rectifying the decision of a Member of Board of Revenue, which suffered from incorrect interpretation or application of law or non-appreciation of facts, it would lead to an un attending cycle of litigation---Such power, in the circumstances, was not available to any successor to adjudge the validity of order of his predecessor; it was not every cause which would make the remedy by way of review available, but such cause must be relatable to the circumstances as discovery of new and important matter or some apparent mistake or error on the face of the record---Scope of review was limited and could be invoked and allowed only on the grounds specifically provided in the provision of law; and was not to be mistaken with appeal---Power to review could be…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492