Case Details

Citation(s)
1983 SLG 289 1983 SLD 289 1983 SCMR 366
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 1180 of 1981 and 115 of 1982, decision dated: 13-03-1982.(Against the order of the Lahore. High Court, dated 12 12 1981 passed in Civil Revisions Nos. 1587 and 1988 of 1981)
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN AND SHAFIUR RAHMAN, JJ
Malik Noor Muhammad Awan, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehdi Khan. Mehtab, Advocate on-Record for Petitioners. M. Aslam and Shaukat Ali Saqib, Advocates Supreme Court for
Respondents.

MEHRAM KHAN AND OTHERS

VS

FATEH KHAN AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) -- S. 9 Jurisdiction Mere demarcation of boundaries of agricultural land A matter within exclusive domain of revenue authorities To claim possession of area demarcated and encroached upon, held, a suit necessarily to be filed in a Civil Court High Court (Lahore) Rules and Orders, Vol. I. [Jurisdiction]. ORDER SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J. These two petitions between the same parties relating to different lands raise the same question of law and are being disposed of by this order. 2. The petitioners and the respondents own agricultural land which happen to be contiguous. The respondents suspected encroachment on their land and they filed an application for getting it demarcated by the revenue staff which was done on 7 10 1977 with police assistance as the parties were on inimical terms. The respondents thereafter instituted civil suits for possession of the property so encroached upon by the petitioners. During the pendency of the suit the trial Court at first appointed Tehsildar (Settlement) Mianwali as local Commissioner but he did not submit his report whereupon he was replaced by a Naib Tehsildar (Settlement) who also reported his inability. . It is said that with the consent of the counsel for both the parties a retired Qanoongo was appointed local Commissioner whose report was made the basis and the suit of the plaintiff respondents was decreed in terms of his report. That judgments and decrees have been maintained on appeal by the District Judge and on second appeal by the High Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the civil Court bad no jurisdiction to determine the question of encroachment as it was a matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Revenue Officer. It is further contended that the statement of Patwari that at the, time of demarcation by the local Commissioner be found no encroachment should have been preferred over that of the local Commissioner. Finally it was said that there was an encroachment on the petitioners' land by the respondents and till that encroachment was…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492