Case Details

Citation(s)
1974 SLG 138 1974 SLD 138 1974 SCMR 184
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 119 of 1973, decision dated: 8th October 1973.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, made on the 26th of February 1973, in L. P. A. No. 158 of 1966)
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI AND ANWARUL HAQ, JJ
M. Ahmad Hasan Khan, Advocate instructed by Mahmood A. Qureshf, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Mian Saeedur Rahman, Advocate instructed by Sh. Salah-ud-Din, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents.

ABDUL GHANI

VS

SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Limitation Act (IX of 1905)-----S. 3 read with Constitution of Pakistan (1972), Art. 186(3)--­Condonation of 'delay-Settlement authorities consciously con­sidering question of delay, giving-good reasons for the view taken and refusing to condone delay-Power to condone delay being vested in settlement authorities, High Court, held, could interfere with such exercise of discretion only if power not exercised on correct and judicious principles -Petitioner grossly neglecting to pursue remedy available under law, petition for leave to appeal dismissed. ORDER ANWARUL HAQ, J.-This petition for special leave to appeal is directed against an order made by a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court on the 26th of February 1973, whereby an appeal filed by the petitioner Abdul Ghani under clause 10 of the Letters Patent in respect of the transfer of an evacuee house situate in Canal Park, Lahore, was dismissed. The petitioner had submitted an application in form CH for the transfer of the house, but tile same was transferred by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner by his order dated 2y-7-1960 to Ghulam Qadir, the father of respondent No. 4 Muhammad Sharif, on the basis of the latter's prior possession as a regular allottee. In the year 1961, the petitioner filed a review petition and also tiled a time-barred appeal on 13-9-1961. The review petition was dismissed on account of the pendency of the appeal, and the appeal was dismissed by the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner on 1y-12-1962 on account of being barred by time, with no satisfactory explanation for the delay. 'The petitioner thereupon tiled a revision petition but tote same was dismissed by the learned Settlement Commissioner on 7-1-1963. The petitioner then invoked the writ jurisdiction of the High Court, but failed. As already stated, his appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent has also been dismissed. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner, the Settlement Commissioner and the learned Judges of; the High Court have failed to take note of the fact that the delay which occurred on the part of the petitioner in tiling the appeal -was due to his…
🔒
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