| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 2135 2015 SLD 2135 2015 YLR 1923 |
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2011, decided on 6th January, 2015. DATE of hearing: 19th December, 2014. (On appeal from the judgment of the High Court dated 21-11-2009 in Writ Petition No. 98 of 2008)
MUHAMMAD AZAM KHAN, C.J. AND CH. MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM ZIA, J
Raja Khalid Mehmood Khan for Appellants. Haji Ch. Muhammad Anwar for
Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2011, decided on 6th January, 2015. DATE of hearing: 19th December, 2014. (On appeal from the judgment of the High Court dated 21-11-2009 in Writ Petition No. 98 of 2008)
MUHAMMAD AZAM KHAN, C.J. AND CH. MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM ZIA, J
Raja Khalid Mehmood Khan for Appellants. Haji Ch. Muhammad Anwar for
Respondents
MUHAMMAD MALIK and another
VS
MANZOOR HUSSAIN and 91 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Board of Revenue Act, 1993--- ----S. 6 (3)---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S.44---Writ petition before High Court---Laches, doctrine of---Applicability---Non-impleadment of necessary party---Effect---Every order passed by Member Board of Revenue to be deemed to be an order of Board of Revenue---If such order was challenged, Board of Revenue was a necessary party to be impleaded in the line of respondents---Writ petition was not maintainable without arraying the Board of Revenue as party in the line of respondents---Writ petition was filed after a period of one year and ten months from the date of first order and after a period of five months from the date of second order---Mere delay could not be made a ground for dismissal of writ petition but unexplained delay was always considered fatal in writ jurisdiction---Petitioners were not vigilant in pursuing their case and filed writ petition after a delay of five months which would attract the doctrine of laches---Petitioners had failed to furnish any explanation with regard to delay of five months---Writ petition, therefore was not maintainable on the ground of laches---Impugned order was passed according to law and within the jurisdictional competence of Board of Revenue---If proceedings in one application for partition were completed and second application remained pending then there was likelihood that a contradictory /order might be passed resulting into multiplicity of proceedings---Order passed by the Board of Revenue was not a final order and had been passed in a legal fashion which was not open to challenge---Legal question which was not raised before the lower courts could not be raised in the Supreme Court if it was raised in the memorandum of appeal or concise statement---Impugned passed by the High Court was set aside and writ petition was dismissed---Appeal was accepted in circumstances. Azad Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir and others v. Haji Summandar Khan and others 1995 MLD 1350; Azad Govt. and 3 others v. Genuine Rights Commission AJK and 7 others 1999 MLD 268; Muhammad Tasleem Khan v. The State 1996 PCr,LJ 580; Syed Miskeen…
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