| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1990 SLG 280 1990 SLD 280 1990 PLD 504 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal N0.371 of 1980, decision dated: 201h December, 1989.
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J., S. USMAN ALI SHAH, ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY AND AJMAL MIAN, JJ
Muhammad Munir Piracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch.Ghularn Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record Nos. 2 to 4.
Civil Appeal N0.371 of 1980, decision dated: 201h December, 1989.
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J., S. USMAN ALI SHAH, ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY AND AJMAL MIAN, JJ
Muhammad Munir Piracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch.Ghularn Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record Nos. 2 to 4.
Syed ALI SHAH
VS
ABDUL SAGHIR KHAN SHERWANT and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)-- .S.20 --- Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3) --- High Court set aside the order passed by the Settlement Commissioner in exercise of his revisional powers in which he had ordered that two rooms and kitchen etc. in occupation of the appellant be included in his transfer documents --- Leave to appeal was granted to consider the question whether High Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction, was justified to set aside the said order of Settlement Commissioner. (b) Supreme Court Rules, 1980-- --- O. XXXIII, RA --- Adjournment of case --- Advocate-on-Record sent telegram to Court stating therein that "respondent had taken brief; no instructions" but did not seek adjournment of the case --- Supreme Court proceeded with the matter ex parte against respondent observing that reason stated in the telegram was not sufficient to seek adjournment. (c) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)-- ---S. 20-- -Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199 --- Appeal --- Limitation--- condonation of delay --- Appeal was, filed against the order of Deputy Settlement Commissioner after several years but Settlement Commissioner addressed himself to the question of limitation and for cogent reasons condoned the delay---' Settlement Commissioner being a revisional authority could take cognizance of the matter of his own at the relevant time, and therefore the question of limitation was of no consequence --- High Court, in its Constitutional jurisdiction, held , was not justified to interfere with the discretionary order of the Settlement Commissioner condoning the delay which was done on good reasons. (d) Displaced Persons, (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)-- --- S.20(3) --- Revisional power of Settlement Commissioner --- Scope. Sheikh Rashid Ahmad v. Settlement Commissioner, Lahore and others 1970 SCMR 278; Ch. Nazir Ahmad Bhatti v. Ch. Noor Muhammad and 3 others 1970 SCMR 716 and Kala v. Board of Revenue and another PLD 1985 SC 2W ref. (e) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)- --- Art. 199 --- Constitutional jurisdiction ---Scope --- Paramount…
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