| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1980 SLG 3068 = 1980 SLD 3068 = 1980 SCMR 360 |
Civil Petition No. 152-R of 1979, decided on 9th December, 1979. (On appeal from the judgment and order dated 28-4-1979 of the Lahore High Court at Lahore in Writ Petition No. 2093 of 1975).
Presented By: Anwarul Haq, C. J. and Muhammad Afzal Zullah, J
Syed Riaz Ahmad Pirzada, Advocate Supreme Court and Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
ALLAH DITTA-Petitioner
VERSUS
GHULAM NABI alias NABI BAKHSH AND OTHERS-Respondents
Law: Land Reforms Regulation, 1972
Section: 25
Law: Punjab Tenancy Act (XVI of 1887)
Section: 50
(a) Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 [M. L. R. 115] Para. 25-Ejectment--High Court's order putting respondent back in possession proceeding on assumption of respondent being a lessee and being not liable to be ejected if in cultivating possession and protection under para. 25 also being available to a lessee-Conten tion regarding High Court's interference with correction of entry in khasra girdawari made by Revenue authorities in circumstances, held, not correct and no interference made with such entries. Muhammad Yousaf v. Province of Punjab P L D 1976 Lah. 328 ref. (b) Punjab Tenancy Act (XVI of 1887) S. 50-Revenue authorities having found respondent to be not a tenant respondent not in position to file suit for. recovery of posses sion under S. 50-High Court in circumstances, held, could declare order of respondent's eviction to be without lawful authority-Cons titution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199. Date of hearing : 9th December, 1979. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.-Leave to appeal is sought by a land- lord, from the order dated 28th April, 1979 passed by the Lahore High Court whereby the respondent's writ petition against his eviction by Revenue Authorities was allowed. The petitioner had purchased agricultural land from one Ahmad Nawaz. Khasra girdawari contained the name of the respondent as tenant on that land. The petitioner made application for the correction of this entry because according to him the respondent was a `lessee' and not a `tenant'. After field enquiry, the petitioner's application was allowed on 18th September, 1974 and respondent's name was entered as lessee. His appeal was dismissed on 7th June, 1975. His revision before the Board of Revenue was dismissed on 9th August. 1975. 1n the…