| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2001 SLG 1371 2001 SLD 1371 2001 PLD 443 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 169 of 1995, decided on 19th October, 2000., (On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore,. dated 2291993 passed in C. R. No. 172D of 1982).
MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI, DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH AND, JAVED LQBAL, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeal No. 169 of 1995, decided on 19th October, 2000., (On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore,. dated 2291993 passed in C. R. No. 172D of 1982).
MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI, DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH AND, JAVED LQBAL, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Mai. RASHID BEG .
VS
REHMAT ULLAH KHAN and 4 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-------Art. 185(3)---Allotment of plot---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider as to whether the High Court was wrong to proceed on the footing that possession of the plot was not delivered to the respondents. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------S. 115---Revision---Concurrent findings of fact by the Courts below--Interference -by High Court in such findings in exercise of revisional jurisdiction---Scope---Where the concurrent findings are based on conjectural presumptions, erroneous assumptions and wrong proposition of law, such findings can be reversed justifiably by High Court while exercising revisional jurisdiction . as conferred upon it under S.115, C.P.C. and interference may be made in the findings when the same are based on insufficient evidence, misreading of evidence, non-consideration of material evidence, erroneous assumption of facts, patent errors of law, arbitrary exercise of power and where unreasonable view on evidence has been take u due to non-reading and misreading of evidence. Karamat Hussain v. Muhammad Zaman PLD 1987 SC 139; Iilahi Bakhsh v. Noor Muhammad PLD 1985 SC 41; Nasir Abbas v. Manzoor Haider Shah PLD 1989 SC 568; Sheikh Muhammad v. Mst. Hashmat Sultana 1989 SCMR 34; Saheb Khan v. Muhammad Pannah PLD 1994 SC 162; Muhammad Bakhsh v. Province of Punjab 1994 SCMR 1836; Zakirullah Khan v. Faizullah Khan 1999 SCMR 971 and Muhammad Siddique v. Muhammad Akram 2000 SCMR 533 ref. (c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------Ss. 42 & 56---Suit for declaration---Allotment of plot=--Disputed plot was cancelled from the name of the defendant and the same remained in his possession---Subsequently the plot was allotted to the plaintiff but the possession was not handed over to him---Authorities intended to cancel the allotment in the name of the plaintiff as he failed to complete construction in the specified period---Such action of the Authorities was assailed by the plaintiff in civil suit which was dismissed by the Trial Court---Judgment and decree of Trial Court was upheld by Lower Appellate Court---High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction set aside the concurrent…
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