Law:

Section:

Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974)-------S. 44---Constitutional jurisdiction. exercise of---Disputed question of fact--­Question involved in case could be easily resolved in the light of the documentary evidence produced by the parties---Even otherwise where no other adequate remedy was available, it was the duty of the Court exercising Constitutional jurisdiction to decide disputed questions of fact if it was possible to do so in the light of affidavits or other evidence produced by the parties. JUDGMENT BASHARAT AHMAD SHAIKH, J.---A writ petition filed by Ch. Muhammad Mahmood, appellant herein, calling in question the order of allotment of a plot in Mirpur Town to respondent No.l, Aurangzeb has been dismissed by the High Court and the appellant was granted leave to appeal in light of the submissions that the High Court had grossly misread the record of the case. 2. The point in,dispute in the case is short. The appellant claims that he was allotted plot No. l-B, sub-sector E-3, Part-II, on 29th of June 1981, by the Allotment Committee of Mirpur, Development Authority. Subsequently the sub­sector was transferred to the Municipal Committee Mirpur, now a Corporation, which prepared a new scheme and marked a new plot on the same location giving it a new number, namely, 119-E showing it to be in sub-sector E-3, Part I. It is claimed that the place is the same and that by doing so allotment made in favour of the appellant has been rendered non-existent, although'the plot had been allotted in due course of law, he had paid the price of the land and had also taken over possession. So far as the factum of allotment and payment of price is concerned it is evidenced by documents and receipts and is not disputed. 3. Both the parties filed documents. At a later stage of the proceeding the appellant moved an application before the High Court that he wanted to file certified copies of some documents of which uncertified copies had already been placed on the record. This application was accepted. 4. While deciding the case the learned Judge, who was seized of the matter, observed in paragraph 7 of the judgment that pivotal question in controversy…

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