' UMAR ATA BANDIAL, J.-- The order dated 26-1-2009 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur declining to proceed against the respondents under the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 was assailed by the appellant in Writ Petition No,6046 of 2009 before this Court. By order dated 7-7- 2009, interference with the impugned order was declined on the ground that no allegation of land mafia or land grabbers was made in the case, therefore the proper remedy lay before the learned civil court rather than under the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005. Reliance is placed on Zahoor Ahmad's case (PLD 2007 Lahore 231).
2. In aid of this appeal, learned counsel has read to us the two judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, namely, Mumtaz Hussain v. Dr. Nasir Khan and others (2010 SCMR 1254) and Shahabuddin v.
The State (PLD 2010 SC 725). In both judgments, it is observed that the remedy under the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005, is not confined to the case of land grabbers and land mafia. Such a remedy may also be available against a party in possession of a property that does not have its lawful ownership. With reference to Zahoor Ahmad's case (PLD 2007 Lahore 231), it is noted in the first precedent by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the same is still under appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the rule laid down therein is under review.
3. Be that as it may, on the express view stated by the Hon'ble Supreme in the afore-noted two precedents cases, unless the contending parties are at odds in civil litigation regarding title of the disputed property, illegal acquisition of possession of disputed property is a matter that can be taken cognizance of even though no land grabbers or land mafia are. Involved. Learned counsel for the respondents has rebutted the above view by reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as Bashir Ahmad versus Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad and 4 others (PLD 2010 SC 661), wherein Zahoor Ahmad's case (PLD 2007 Lahore' 231) is treated as precedent. The above-noted two judgments by the Hon'ble Supreme Court defer such an approach until the appeal in the Zahoor Ahmad's case, is decided. As the benefit of the statutory remedy under the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 is thereby enlarged by the Hon'ble Supreme Court therefore with utmost respect we follow that view.
4. There is nothing on our record to show existence of a civil dispute between the parties nor of any civil litigation between them. Accordingly, the appeal is accepted and the matter is returned to the learned ASJ, Kasur to proceed afresh in the matter strictly in accordance with law. The appeal stands disposed of.