| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 1473 2016 SLD 1473 2016 SCMR 2050 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 2106-L of 2014, decided on 11th March, 2016. Date of hearing: 11th March, 2016.
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JUSTICE AND IQBAL HAMEEDUR RAHMAN, JUSTICE
Muhammad Sohail Dar, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
Civil Petition No. 2106-L of 2014, decided on 11th March, 2016. Date of hearing: 11th March, 2016.
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JUSTICE AND IQBAL HAMEEDUR RAHMAN, JUSTICE
Muhammad Sohail Dar, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD ARIF THROUGH L.RS.
VS
DISTRICT COORDINATION OFFICER/CHAIRMAN, P&D BOARD, LDA AND OTHERS
Law: Lahore Development Authority Act, (XXX of 1975)
Section: 4,6(3)(iv)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 185(3)
Lahore Development Authority Act (XXX of 1975)--- ----S. 6(3)(iv)--- Illegal and unauthorized occupation of public property---Such occupation could not be permitted to be legalized by misuse of the process of the law---Any concession given or statement made by officials of the Development Authority during litigation over ownership of public property did not give any right to the illegal occupant of such property---Any process started by the Development Authority to assess the price of illegally occupied property and receive the same from the illegal occupant, did not bind the authority to allot or transfer the plot in the name of illegal occupant. Suit plot, which was public property, was in occupation of the plaintiffs who raised a building thereon. Plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction against the Development Authority to protect their possession of the plot. Said suit was dismissed and appeal filed there against was also dismissed. Plaintiffs filed a constitutional petition which was accepted by the Single Judge of the High Court with the direction that the Development Authority should receive the price of the plot assessed by the Price Committee and transfer the same in the name of the plaintiffs, and that the possession of the plaintiffs over the plot should be protected. Division Bench of the High Court set aside the order passed by Single Judge by holding that the plaintiffs were in unauthorized possession of suit plot; that any concession given or statement made by officials of the Development Authority during the proceedings of the Constitutional petition before the Single Judge of the High Court did not give any right to the plaintiffs over suit plot; that if any process had been started by the Development Authority for assessment of price of plot, the same did not bind the Authority to allot or transfer the plot in the name of plaintiffs, and that even otherwise, plaintiffs had not shown that they ever deposited any tentative amount or offered the same to the Authority to show their bona fides. Legal heirs of plaintiff did not have any titled documents to suit plot but were in illegal occupation of the said plot for more than three…
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