Case Details

Citation(s)
1953 SLG 155 1953 SLD 155 1953 PLD 557
Lahore High Court
Appeal No. 35 of 1953, decided on 22nd May 1953, from the order of Ghulam Rabbani, Sessions Judge, Shahpur at Sargodha, dated the 20th December, 1952, convicting the appellants
MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C.J. AND MUHAMMAD, JAN, J
S. Muhammad Iqbal and S. H. Jaffary for Appellants. S. A. Mahmood, Assistant Advocate-General for
Respondent

KHURSHID AND others

VS

THE CROWN

Law:

Section:

Criminal trespass---Tenant's possession brought to an end by execution of order of ejectment under Punjab Protection and Restoration of Tenancy Rights Act (XIII of 1950) and landlord let into possession-Execution of order, irregular in that order having been issued by a Naib---Tehsildar was executed by Tehsildar on transfer of proceedings by former to latter---Irregularity, held, did not affect jurisdiction of Tehsildar to act in the matter---Tenant's party trespassing on land and in trying forcibly to oust landlord's possession caused death of a son of landlord---Tenant's party, held guilty of criminal trespass and a member of party, of murder. An order of ejectment from land was issued by the Naib­-Tehsildar against a tenant. At the time when the order was sought to be executed, there was some confusion about the authority which was competent to execute such orders. The Naib-Tehsildar thought that he had no jurisdiction and therefore passed on the order for execution to the Tehsildar. The Tehsildar in his evidence stated that the order could also be executed by the Naib-Tehsildar though the practice in those days was for the Tehsildar to execute such orders. It was obvious that under the Act of 1950 the Naib-Tehsildar could, if he so chose, issue a warrant for ejectment. Keeping in view, however, the prevai­ling practice, he passed on the application for execution to the Tehsildar. This he could only do if the landlord made an appli­cation for the transfer of the application to the Tehsildar. No such application was however made by the landlord, there was therefore an irregularity in the Naib-Tehsildar's refusal to take execution proceedings himself and in forwarding the application for execution to the Tehsildar. The point was whether this irregularity had the effect of rendering the entire proceedings taken by the Tehsildar null and void and of still retaining the possession of the land with the tenant despite the execution of the warrant. Held, that the lack of jurisdiction, in order to make proceed­ings in execution taken by a Court inoperative, must either be a lack of jurisdiction in that Court to act in the manner that it did or a lack of jurisdiction…
🔒
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