| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1962 SLG = 1962 SLD 2570 = 1962 PLD 21 |
West Pakistan
Revision Side No. 281 of 1960-61, decided on 18th September 1961, District Lahore.
Presented By: A. M. Khan Leghari, Member Board of Revenue
Revision Side No. 281 of 1960-61, decided on 18th September 1961, District Lahore.
Presented By: A. M. Khan Leghari, Member Board of Revenue
Nawabzada Mirza MUNAWAR ALI BEG Petitioner
VERSUS
MANZOOR AHMAD AND TWO OTHERS Respondents
Law: Punjab Revenue Act, (XVII of 1887)
Section: S. 37.
Mutation-Attestation-Without adjudication of important issues involved-Most improper-Punjab Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1887), S. 37. Usufructuary mortgage-Transaction void under law --Converted into permissible 20 years' usufructuary mortgage --Not to be validated 10 years after-Punjab Lands Revenue Act (XVII of 1887), S. 15 (1) (c). Mutation-Sanctioned in absence of vendor on basis of ten years' old registereddeed Violation of principles-Attesting Revenue Officer to be charge-sheeted. Punjab Alienation of Land Act (XIII of 1900), S. 21-A Object-To keep Deputy Commissioner informed of cases to be appealed against by him. Punjab Alienation of Land Act (XIII of 1900), S. 2 (3) "Land" - Whether `ghair mumkin kallar' is `land'-(Quaere). ORDER This is a revision petition from the order of the Commis sioner, Lahore Division, dated 30th March 1961, whereby he virtually dismissed the petitioner's appeal from the D. C., Lahore's order dated 2-11-1959, on the ground that the respondent had obtained a decree from the Civil Court permanently restraining Revenue Officers to come into the case of redemption. The facts briefly are that Nawabzada Munawar Ali Beg petitioner sold 20 Canals of land situate in revenue estate Guru Mangat Koana to Muhammad Abdullah deceased, father of the respondents for Rs. 3,500 on 31-1-1941. At the time of attestation of the sale mutation No. 24, the Revenue Officer, asked the parties for proof whether the vendee belonged to a Notified Agricultural Tribe of the same group. Muhammad Abdullah had produced copies of revenue records of the corporation, which showed him to be a Rajput. These were not accepted by the Revenue Officer, who referred the matter to the Deputy Commissioner, vide his order dated 19-2-42 on the mutation sheet. The latter refused to decide the question of Muhammad Abdullah's caste in summary mutation proceedings and ordered as 20 Kanals was a large area that an enquiry to be made from him whether he was prepared to take the land on usufructuary mortgage. He also said that Muhammad Abdullah be advised, if he so desired, to get the question of…