Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 810 2022 SLD 810 2022 SCMR 759
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions Nos. 2338-L and 2258-L of 2017, decision dated: 19-11-2021, hearing date: 19-11-2021. (Against judgment dated 22.06.2017 of Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Civil Revision No. 2937 of 2014)
IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE, SAJJAD ALI SHAH, JUSTICE, MUNIB AKHTAR, JUSTICE
Qasim Ali Chauhan, Additional A.G. Punjab for Petitioners (in C.P. No. 2338-L of 2017). Syed M. Kaleem A. Khurshid, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners (in C.P. No. 2258-L of 2017). Qasim Ali Chauhan, Additional A.G. Punjab for
Respondents (in

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB THROUGH DO(R) SHEIKHUPURA AND OTHERS

VS

JAVED AKBAR AND OTHErs

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42,54

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ---Ss. 42 , 54---Suit for declaration and permanent injunction---Construction of pillars and boundary wall on a main road by Provincial Government---Plea of respondents that erection of pillars and construction of the wall in front of their land would not only block the view and exposure of their land but also cause hindrance in approaching the main road, and that as a consequence the land of the respondents would become valueless---High Court in its revisional jurisdiction gave directions that the Provincial Government shall provide a passage of 20 ft. to the respondents excluding the passage of Rajbah for transportation and exposure---Legality---Land whereupon the Provincial Government was constructing pillars and erecting a wall was owned by the Provincial Government having acquired the same from the predecessors of the respondents---Such predecessors had challenged the assessment of price made by the Land Acquisition Collector upto the Supreme Court and the matter stood concluded, and at no stage was any other relief soughts were aware of the modes of access to their land which had not in any manner been blocked by the Provincial Government---Just by reason of fact that the respondents had decided to construct a commercial building/plaza/ market on their land did not create any additional rights in their favour---Land in question was agricultural in nature and no commercial building/shopping plaza or offices, etc existed on the same---When no such commercial activity was being undertaken on the land of the respondents, there was no ground for them to raise an objection relating to blockage of view of the same---Further, the Provincial Government, which was the owner of the land abutting the road, could not be stopped from utilizing it in a manner for which it was specifically acquired and the Court could not carve out a passage in the land of another person specially when no right of easement was claimed or asserteds failed to discharge the onus of proving the fact that the passage of the respondents’ land was being closed by raising pillars and a wall on the land acquired by the Provincial Government, and that such…
🔒
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