| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1973 SLG 26 1973 SLD 26 1973 SCMR 92 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-88 of 1972, decision dated: 27th February 1973.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, Karachi, dated the 9th October 1972, in Writ Petition No. 174 of 1968)
SAJJAD AHMAD AND WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, JJ
Nasir Shahmir, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by V. A. Kidwai, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-88 of 1972, decision dated: 27th February 1973.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, Karachi, dated the 9th October 1972, in Writ Petition No. 174 of 1968)
SAJJAD AHMAD AND WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, JJ
Nasir Shahmir, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by V. A. Kidwai, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
Syed JAMSHED ALI
VS
Mst. KARIMAN BEGUM AND another
Law:
Section:
Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), Sched., Part I-Division of house by Settlement Authorities based on proper appreciation of evidence produced by parties-Substantial justice done-Order not interfered with by Supreme Court. ORDER WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-The dispute between the parties relates to House No. F/67-1284/8, corresponding old No. F. 133, Giddu Road, Hyderabad. The petitioner submitted his C. H. form for the transfer of the whole house on the 7th July 1959. Respondent No. 1 is in possession of the other half of the house. She submitted her C. H. form for the transfer of the portion in possession of her husband and herself. The petitioner was transferred the portion in his possession on the 17th November 1959, and respondent No. 1 was transferred the portion in her possession on the 19th November 1959. The matter was taken to the Additional Settlement Commissioner, who, vide his order dated the 14th June 1960, dismissed the appeal holding that both the claimants are in possession of the independent tenement with one entrance and therefore, there was no reason to interfere with the decision of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner. The petitioner filed revision petition against this order and the Settlement Commissioner, by order dated the 7th September 1960, allowed the revision and held that the house was indivisible. The matter was taken to the Chief Settlement Commissioner, who by his order dated the 4th August 1961, rejected it holding that he saw no reason to interfere. Respondent No. 1 challenged the last mentioned order in Writ Petition No. 794 of 1961, which was allowed on the 14th January 1965, and the case was remanded for decision to the Settlement Commissioner according to law. The learned Settlement Commissioner, after hearing the parties, held that the property was divisible and restored the order of the Additional Settlement Commissioner dated the 14th June 1960. He was of the opinion that…
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