| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1987 SLG 1695 1987 SLD 1695 1987 SCMR 999 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 139 of 1983, decided on 25th March, 1987. (On appeal from the , dated 2-11-1982 of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi in Writ Petition NO. 702/11 of 1976).Date of hearing: 25th March, 1987.
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J., NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN, JAVID IQBAL, GHULAM MUJADDID MIRZA AND ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, JJ
Abdul Majid Khan, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Hafiz S.A. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court with Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 1. Nemo for
Respondent No.2.
Civil Appeal No. 139 of 1983, decided on 25th March, 1987. (On appeal from the , dated 2-11-1982 of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi in Writ Petition NO. 702/11 of 1976).Date of hearing: 25th March, 1987.
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J., NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN, JAVID IQBAL, GHULAM MUJADDID MIRZA AND ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, JJ
Abdul Majid Khan, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Hafiz S.A. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court with Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 1. Nemo for
Respondent No.2.
MUHAMMAD BASHIR--Appellant
VS
Mst. NASIRAN and another--Respondents
Law:
Section:
(a) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)-- ---S. 10--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)--Demarcation of property--Leave to appeal granted to consider the question whether High Court was right in holding that Civil Court was the only competent forum to adjudicate the dispute regarding demarcation of property which existed between the parties.--[Jurisdiction]. (b) Displaced Persons Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)- ---S. 10 & Sched.--Transfer of property--Both appellant and respondent themselves had gone to settlement authorities for identification of the property transferred to them under two auctions--Rule that after issuance of P.T.Ds, property goes out of the compensation pool and Settlement Authorities become functus offico to determine and demarcate the boundaries except to the extent provided for in Permanent Transfer Rules, 1961, held, would not be applicable in circumstances--Jurisdiction of civil Court--Extent in Settlement cases. Rule that after the issuance of the P.T.D. the property goes out of the compensation pool and the Settlement authorities become functus officio to determine and demarcate the boundaries except to the extent provided for in the Permanent Transfer Rules is not of universal application. It is not correct that in all cases after the issuance of the P.T.Ds. the Settlement Authorities become functus officio to make any type of demarcation because it would depend upon the circumstances of each case whether the Settlement Authorities were competent to demarcate /identify and clarify the position in regard to the property transferred to them. Where the appellants and respondents had themselves gone to the Settlement Authorities for identification of the property transferred to them under the two auctions the respondent could not, in such circumstances, be heard to submit that the Settlement Authorities had no jurisdiction in the matter to clarify the position. Normally the authority who transfers a property to a person is the proper authority to identify what property it is transferring to him. The Civil Courts, moreover, can only ascertain and declare the rights…
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