| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1952 SLG 160 1952 SLD 160 1952 PLD 380 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No. 334 of 1950 decided on 24th April, 1952, from the decree of the Court of Major Chaudhri Fazl-i-Haq, Senior Civil Judge, Multan, exercising enhanced appellate powers, dated the 27th day of November 1950 reversing that of Chaudhri
RAHMAN, J
Muhammad Amin Khan, for Appellant. Muhammad Iqbal Hussain, for
Respondent.
Regular Second Appeal No. 334 of 1950 decided on 24th April, 1952, from the decree of the Court of Major Chaudhri Fazl-i-Haq, Senior Civil Judge, Multan, exercising enhanced appellate powers, dated the 27th day of November 1950 reversing that of Chaudhri
RAHMAN, J
Muhammad Amin Khan, for Appellant. Muhammad Iqbal Hussain, for
Respondent.
Mst. IQBAL BEGUM
VS
MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE through the Administrator, Municipal Committee, Multan
Law:
Section:
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)----------S. 80-"Public Officer" -Administrator appointed on supersession of Municipal Committee -Whether notice necessary in suit against-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 2 (17) items (f), (g), (h)-Punjab Municipal Act (III of 1911), S. 238. After the supersession order is passed, all property that previously vested in the Committee, vests in the Crown and the Administrator who is an officer appointed by Government, even if he is paid out of Municipal funds, should be regarded as one who is paid by the Crown during the period of supersession, within the meaning of item (h) of clause 17 of section 2 Civil P. C. His functions would moreover, bring him within the purview of items (f) and (g) of clause (17) of section a, Civil P. C., inasmuch as he is an officer whose duty it is "'to protect the public health, safety or convenience" and also to take, receive, keep or expend any property" on behalf of the Crown. An administrator, therefore, would seem to be a "public officer" and in order to challenge his action, a condition precedent to the institution of the suit would be to give the notice prescribed by section 80, Civil P. C. Mahamahopadyaya Rangachariar v. The Municipal Council of Kumbakonam I L R 29 (1906) Mad. 539, D B ; Administrator Lahore Municipality v. Daulat Ram Kapur A I R 1942 F. C. 14 ; Muhammad Shad v. Sialkot Municipality and another A I L 1940 Lah, 451 ; Village Sanitation Panchayat Committee v. S. R. Deshmubh A I R 1929 Nag. 70 ; Vasudeva Rao v. Municipal Council Anantapur A I R 1930 Mad. 844 ; Hazi Jamal Noor Muhammad v. Governor-General in Council, A I R 1947 Cal. 26 ; Governor-General of India in Council v. U. Raghunandan A I R 1947 Mad. 64 ref. JUDGMENT S. A. RAHMAN, J.-This is a regular second appeal arising out of an action brought by Mst. Iqbal Begum appellant to challenge two notices purporting to have been issued by the Secretary, Municipal Committee, Multan, under sections 195 and 172 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), on the 30th of September, 1948. The Municipal Committee had been superseded under section 238 of the Act, by a notification of tree Provincial…
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