| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1977 SLG 244 1977 SLD 244 1977 PLD 164 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 48-R and 284 of 1969, decision dated: 23rd December 1976. dates of hearing : 26th, 27th and 28th May 1976
SALAHUDDIN AHMED, MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA AND DORAB PATEL, JJ
C. A. No. 48-R of 1969. Sh. Ghias Muhammad, Senior Advocate and Abdul Karim, Advocate-on, Record (absent) for Appellant. Makbool Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Iftikhar-ud-Din Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record (absent) Nos. 1 and 2. C. A. No. 284 of
Civil Appeals Nos. 48-R and 284 of 1969, decision dated: 23rd December 1976. dates of hearing : 26th, 27th and 28th May 1976
SALAHUDDIN AHMED, MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA AND DORAB PATEL, JJ
C. A. No. 48-R of 1969. Sh. Ghias Muhammad, Senior Advocate and Abdul Karim, Advocate-on, Record (absent) for Appellant. Makbool Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Iftikhar-ud-Din Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record (absent) Nos. 1 and 2. C. A. No. 284 of
Civil Appeal No. 48-R of 1969 THE BANK OF BAHAWALPUR LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGER -
VS
The CHIEF SETTLEMENT & REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER, LAHORE AND another AND Civil Appeal No. 284 of 1969 ZAHEER-ULAMAN KHAN And other vs The CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMI
Law:
Section:
Art. 185(3)-Leave to appeal to Supreme Court-Conflict of views between High Courts on a question of law-Matter also one of first impression and involving question of statutory provision of general public importance-Leave to appeal granted.-[Leave to appeal to Supreme Court]. [p. 168]A Haji Abdul Karim v. The Chief Settlement Commissioner and others P L D 1961 Lab. 394 ; Subedar Muhammad Afzal v. Syed Nafis Ahmad and others P L D 1962 Lab. 45 and Dr. Cowas C. Mehia v. Additional Settlement & Rehabilitation Commissioner and others P L D 1963 Kar. 938 ref. Per Salabuddin Ahmed and Dorab Patel, JJ. (Majority view)- (b) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)- S. 30 read with S. 2(4), (6), second proviso, and Ministry of Rehabilitation Notification No. F. 1(27)/59-SI, dated 13th October 1959-Big mansions-Ejectment, protection against-Expression "any evacuee house" mentioned in S. 30 if strictly confined to "house"' as defined in S. 2(4) and not to "big mansions", protection: under S. 30 not available to occupants of "big mansions"-Expression, on other hand, if including "big mansions," person in occupation not entitled to protection under S. 30 unless his possession fell within meaning of S. 2(6)-Occupants not having discharged burden of proving their "possession" falling within meaning of word as given in S. 2(6) read with Notification dated 13-10-59, protection under S. 30, held, not available-[Per Muhammad Afzal Cheema, J. (contra)]Definitions of terms in statutes being merely declaratory not to be unnecessarily inflicted where not fitting in with subject and context and leading to anomalies-Definitions of "house' or "possession" in S. 2 being repugnant to subject or context, word "house" in S. 30 to be interpreted in its ordinary sense and not in technical sense envisaged by S. 2(4) -No reason to deny protection under S. 30 to occupants of big mansions, discriminating their case artificially from those of occupants of houses. Per Salabuddin Ahmed and Dorab Patel, JJ- None of the occupants has satisfied that he has been in "possession" of the mansion concerned within the meaning of the word "possession" as given in section…
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