| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1970 SLG 3181 1970 SLD 3181 = 1970 PLD 560 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 721 of 1967, decided on 3rd December 1968.
Presented By: Nasim Hasan Shah, J
Zamir Hussain for Petitioner. A. Waheed Saleem for
Respondent.
Civil Revision No. 721 of 1967, decided on 3rd December 1968.
Presented By: Nasim Hasan Shah, J
Zamir Hussain for Petitioner. A. Waheed Saleem for
Respondent.
FAZAL MUHAMMAD---Defendant---Petitioner
VERSUS
MUHAMMAD USMAN---Plaintiff---Respondent
Law: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958
Section: 7, 25
(a) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), Ss. 7 & 25---Suit for restoration of possession under S. 9, Speck Relief Act, 1877---Not barred by provisions of Ss. 7 & 25---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 9 and Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 9. A P. T. O. was issued by the Settlement Department in favour of the defendant in respect of the disputed house. The defendant entered into a sale agreement with the plaintiff and after receiving advance payment delivered possession of the house to the plaintiff: He further undertook to obtain permanent trans fer deed and then to complete the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff upon being forcibly dispossessed thereafter by the defendant filed suit under section 9, Specific Relief Act, 1877 for restoration of possession. It was contended on behalf of the defendant that only a provisional transfer order had been issued in his favour and as such the property still being a part of compensation pool no civil Court possessed jurisdiction in the matter in view of the provisions of sections 7 and 25 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958. It was also contended that according to the terms of the P. T. O. the defendant could not alienate the house and as such the agreement of sale being void could not be enforced by civil Court. These contentions were rejected Held: The provisions of sections 7 and 25 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation), Act, 1958 do not operate to oust the jurisdiction of civil Courts in all matters but only to the extent mentioned therein. It is an undisputed propo sition of law that the jurisdiction of the civil Courts cannot be taken away except by express provisions or by necessary implica tion. By section 9, Civil Procedure Code the civil Courts have jurisdiction to entertain all suits of civil nature except those the cognizance of which is expressly or impliedly barred. Section 7 of the Act (XXVIII of 1958) exempts property which forms part of the compensation pool from being proceeded against in any claim in execution of any decree or order or by any other process of Court or other…