Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 1836 2016 SLD 1836
Lahore High Court
FAO No. 272 of 2008, 20.01.2016
ALI AKBAR QURESHI, J

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

Mst. Shameem Akhtar

VS

Govt. Of Punjab, Etc.

Law:

Section:

Keywords: Locus Standi, Prescribed Time, Private Property, Erred In Law, Trial Court, Compensation, Time Limit, Immovable Property, Owner Of The Property, Barred By Time, Question Of Law, Period Of Limitation Result: Ali Akbar Qureshi, J:- This first appeal calls in question the validity and propriety of an order dated 01.08.2008, passed by the learned Addl: District Judge, Lahore, while exercising the powers conferred under Section 10 of the West Pakistan Requisitioning of Immovable Property (Temporary Powers) Rules, 1962, on a petition filed before the learned District Judge, Lahore, by the appellant for settlement of the compensation of the property owned by the appellant and requisitioned by respondent No.1. 2. The appellant, being the owner of the suit property which was requisitioned by respondent No.1/Government of Punjab, through Secretary Education, Civil Secretariat, Lahore, filed a petition under Section 10 of the West Pakistan Requisitioning of Immovable Property (Temporary Powers) Rules, 1962, for settlement of the compensation of requisitioned property (enhancement of compensation) on the ground, that the suit property owned by the appellant measuring 6 marlas, consisted of 8 rooms and open space was requisitioned by the respondent No.1 on 06.03.1978 for running a school namely M-B Islamia Girls Middle School, Mughalpura, Lahore and started depositing the compensation @ Rs.450/- per month in favour of the owner, the compensation being deposited by the respondent-government was not just, fair and lastly prayed that the compensation (rent) be enhanced to Rs.9,000/- from the date it was requisitioned. The suit was contested by the respondents on the ground, that the claim is barred by time and the compensation being paid by respondent No.1 is just fair and the appellant is not owner of the property. Learned Additional District Judge to whom the case was entrusted framed the following issues:- 1. Whether the petitioner has no locus standi and cause of action? OPR 2. Whether the petition is not maintainable? 3. Whether the petitioner is entitled to assessment of fair compensation? If so, to what extent? OPP 4. Relief. The learned Additional District…
🔒
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