Case Details

Citation(s)
1981 SLG 3237 = 1981 SLD 3237 = 1981 SCMR 777
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 1067 of 1975, decided on 25th February 1981. (On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 4-9-75 in W. P. No. 93/67).
Presented By: Anwarul Haq, C. J, and Shafi-ur-Rehman, J
Salahuddin, Advocate-on-Record and Hasan Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondent.     

AMANULLAH KHAN ETC. -Petitioners

VERSUS

MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE (CONSOLIDATION), PUNJAB--Respondent

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O. XXII, r. 3

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) O. XXII, r. 3-Writ proceedings--Abatement-Civil Procedure Code, 1908, held, fully applicable to constitutional petitions and application for substitution of legal heirs must be made within prescribed time-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199.-[Abatement] Chandand others v. Abdul Ghafoor and others P L D 1965 Lah. 596, Hussain Bakhsh v. Settlement Commissioner P L D 1970 S C 1 and Abdul Ghani v. Settlement Commissioner 1971 S C M R 98 ref.       Date of hearing : 25th February, 1981.                                                                                                                                           ORDBR SHAFT-UR-REHMAN, J.-The petitioners, who are the successor-in-interest of one Abdullah, seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 4th September, 1975 whereby a constitutional petition filed by Abdullah was held to have abated and the claim of the petitioners to have the abatement set aside and to implead them as petitioners was rejected. 2. Abdullah filed a constitutional petition in the year 1967. He challenged orders passed by the authorities dealing with the consolidation of holdings in Village Burj Cheema, Tehsil Daska, District Sialkot. Abdullah died on 3rd April, 1971 while this constitutional petition was still pending. He left behind the petitioners who are the five sons, the four daughters and a widow. The petitioners claimed that they remained uninformed of the pendency of the constitutional petition and it was on the 2nd September, 1975 that they learnt from their opponents that the matter was pending in the High Court. The very next day they moved applications for being impleaded as petitioners and sought condonation of the delay. 3. The learned Judge in the High Court dealt with their petition and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register