| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1976 SLG 359 1976 SLD 359 1976 SCMR 491 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 577 of 1972, decision dated: 18th January 1974
HAMOODUR RAHMAN. C.J. AND ANWARUL HAQ, J
Mian Nusrat Ullah. Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Salah-ud-Din Sheikh, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 577 of 1972, decision dated: 18th January 1974
HAMOODUR RAHMAN. C.J. AND ANWARUL HAQ, J
Mian Nusrat Ullah. Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Salah-ud-Din Sheikh, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
Mst. MURAD BIBI
VS
THE CHIEF SETTLEMENT AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, PAKISTAN AND 2 OTHERS
Law:
Section:
Constitution of Pakistan, (1972)--- ---Art.201--Writ jurisdiction-Question, being as to who was in actual possession of property on relevant date, Settlement authorities having decided question and such question being a question of fact and not appearing to suffer from any misreading of evidence or any misconstruction of document, High Court, held, rightly refused to interfere with decision of Settlement authorities in writ jurisdiction-High Court-Not an ordinary Court of appeal while acting in writ jurisdiction and could not review finding of fact arrived at by Settlement authorities if suffering from no defect.-[Writ-Question of fact]. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.-The dispute in this case relates to a shop being No. P. 154 in Ward No. 8, Lakkar Mandi. Karkhana Bazar, Lyallpur. One Shadi Muhammad deceased, the husband of the present petitioner, was an old tenant of the shop. On 5th February 1957, he entered into a partnership with respondent No. 3 and one Nazir Ahmad to run the business in the said shop. As Shadi Muhammad was a local, the Deputy Settlement Commissioner, on the 4th of December 1959, ordered the shop to be disposed of by auction. Shadi Muhammad did not file any appeal against this order, but respondent Ali Muhammad went up in appeal making Shadi Muhammad a respondent in the appeal. Before the Additional Settlement Commissioner, both sides appeared and Shadi Muhammad alleged that the respondent Ali Muhammad was never in possession of the shop. A report was accordingly called for. The Settlement Inspector submitted a report dated 20th of July 1960, showing that the respondent Ali Muhammad was conducting the business of the shop and was in occupation thereof. Shadi Muhammad had no connection with the business. Ali Muhammad also relied on certain documents to establish his possession prior to the 20th of December 1958. The appeal of Ali Muhammad was ultimately accepted on the 20th of September 1960, and he was found entitled to the transfer of the shop in dispute. Against this order, Shadi Muhammad filed a review supporting the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner. It is significant that he neither claimed transfer of the shop in his…
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