| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 3122 = 1981 SLD 3122 = 1981 SCMR 383 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 96 and 97 of 1973, decided on 8th February, 1981. (On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 12-6-1972 in W. P. Nos. 376 of 1969 and 304 of 1969 respectively).
Presented By: Anwarul Haq, C. J. and Shafi-ur-Rahman, J
A. Waheed Saleem, Advopate Supreme Court with Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in both Appeals). S. M. Tayyab, Advocate Supreme Court with Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate -on-Record for
Respondent No. 1. (in C. A. No. 96/73). Abdul Razzak Raja, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 2 to 4 (in C. A. No. 96/73).
Respondent No. 5 : Ex parte (in C. A. No. 96/73). Iqbal Ahmad Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 8 (in C. A. 97/73). Nemo for
Respondents Nos, 9 to 11 (in C. A. 97/73).
Civil Appeals Nos. 96 and 97 of 1973, decided on 8th February, 1981. (On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 12-6-1972 in W. P. Nos. 376 of 1969 and 304 of 1969 respectively).
Presented By: Anwarul Haq, C. J. and Shafi-ur-Rahman, J
A. Waheed Saleem, Advopate Supreme Court with Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in both Appeals). S. M. Tayyab, Advocate Supreme Court with Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate -on-Record for
Respondent No. 1. (in C. A. No. 96/73). Abdul Razzak Raja, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 2 to 4 (in C. A. No. 96/73).
Respondent No. 5 : Ex parte (in C. A. No. 96/73). Iqbal Ahmad Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 8 (in C. A. 97/73). Nemo for
Respondents Nos, 9 to 11 (in C. A. 97/73).
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF-Appellant
VERSUS
DOST MUHAMMAD ETC.-Respondents
Law: West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act (XI of 1957)
Section: 8
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O. XLVII, r. 1
(a) State land Government policy re: tharas in front of shops and houses in Sargodha Town-Principles for disposal of built on tharas. Principles for disposal of built on tharas : Firstly, that the tharas were to go with the shop or house in front of which they were located. Secondly, that they were to go with shops or houses which were located behind the tharas requiring disposal. The third that the tharas were to go with properties of which they formed the frontages. (b) West Pakistan Board of Revenue Act (XI of 1957) S. 8 [as amended by West Pakistan Board of Revenue (Amendment) Act (XVIII of 1964), S. 21 read with S. 6(2) and Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XLVII, r. 1-Review-Member, Board of Revenue taking one view of instructions issued by Government and such view could be taken-Another succeeding Member of Board though competent to review order of his predecessor yet, held, could not review such view simply because another view could be taken. Chhajju Ram v. Neki and others A I R 1922 P C 112 and Muhammad Amir Khan v. Controller of Estate Duty P L D 1962 S C 335 ref. Dates of hearing : 17th and 20th November, 1980.…