Case Details

Citation(s)
1966 SLG 5360 = 1966 SLD 5360 = 1966 PLD 900
West Pakistan Lahore
Letters Patent Appeal No. 409 of 1965, decided on 11th March 1966.  
Presented By: Inamullah, C. J. and Muhammad Fazle Ghani, J
Muhammad Muzaffar Raja for Petitioners.

ZAFAR ALI AND ANOTHER-Petitioners  

VERSUS

  THE CHIEF  SETTLEMENT  AND REHABILITATION COMMISSIONER. AND OTHERS-Respondents

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 29,98

Law: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958

Section: 2(4),2(6)

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1962)------   -----Art. 29-President has power to give retrospective effect by an Ordinance to a provision of law-Displaced Persons Laws Amendment Ordinance (XVIII of 1965).   Mir Ahmad Nawaz Khan Bugti v. Supdt., District Jail, Lyallpur P L D 1964 Lah. 202 ; United Province v. Mst. Atiqa Begum and others A I R 1941 F C 16 and Khaliq & Najam Co. v. Sales-tax Officer, B- Ward, Lahore and another P L D 1959 Lah. 915 rel.   (b)       Displaced Persons  (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)----   ------ S. 2 (4)-Deputy Settlement Commissioner has jurisdiction to declare property as one unit.   (c) Constitution of Pakistan (1962)-----   -----Art. 98-Point, primarily one of fact, not taken before Settlement Authorities-Cannot be gone into by High Court.   (d)       Displaced       Persons           (Compensation          and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)----   ----S. 2 (6)-Settlement Authorities dividing house into shop and residential portion and transferring shop to person in possession of it-Order equitable-Person not in possession of shop-Not entitled to have it transferred in his favour.     Date of hearing : 11th March 1966.    JUDGMENT   INAMULLAH, C. J.-This is an appeal against the order of a learned Single Judge dated 28-10-1965. The facts giving rise to the present appeal briefly put are these. The dispute relates to property No. 185, Ward No. 1, Lyallpur. The appellants were in possession of the chaubara whereas the respondent Nawab Din is in possession of the shop on the ground-floor. The D. S. C. transferred the chaubara along with the shop to the appellants. Nawab Din filed an appeal which was dismissed by the Additional S. C. who, while disposing of the appeal, observed that the property could be disposed of only as one unit. Nawab Din filed a revision before the Settlement Commissioner who transferred-the shop to Nawab Din on the basis of his possession and the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register