AYESHA A. MALIK, J. --- Through this ICA, the Appellant has impugned order dated 17.11.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No, 13857/2014.
2. The basic grievance of the Appellant is that he is owner of plot No, 295-J-II situated at M.A. Johar Town, Lahore ("the Property") from which he was illegally dispossessed by the Respondents. In this regard, a suit for declaration, possession and permanent injunction titled Rana Abdul Ghafoor Khan v. LDA, etc. was filed which was decreed in his favour on 5.12.2013. Thereafter the Respondent LDA filed an appeal which was dismissed vide judgment dated 23.2.2017. The appellant was again forcibly dispossessed by the Respondent LDA, hence he filed W.P. No, 13857/2014 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide the impugned order dated 17.11.2014. Learned counsel argued that the Appellant was never heard in the writ petition and that the general power of attorney relied upon by the Appellant in the writ petition is a duly executed power of attorney in favour of the Appellant; that Rana Abdul Ghafoor executed an agreement to sell in favour, of the Appellant, and that the forcible removal of the Appellant from his property by the Respondent LDA after a decree in his favour is totally against the law and mandates interference by this Court
3. Report and parawise comments have been filed by the Respondent L DA. It is argued on behalf of the Respondents that the Appellant did not file any writ petition as WP No, 13857/2014 was filed by Rana Abdul Ghafoor through its general power of attorney Muhammad Khan (the Appellant in the present appeal). The writ petition was dismissed on the ground that Rana Abdul Ghafoor died in the year 2001, hence the writ petition could not have been filed by his attorney (Appellant) given that the executant of power of attorney was deceased at the time when the writ petition was filed.
It was also argued that there is no right in favour of the Appellant as the Appellant neither filed any suit nor was any judgment or decree passed in his favour. Furthermore that the documents relied upon are all in favour of Rana Abdul Ghafoor and as such the Appellant has no right on the basis of which he seeks possession of the property.
4. We have heard both the learned counsel at length and are in agreement with the findings of the learned Single Judge wherein he has held that Rana Abdul Ghafoor died on 14.7.2001, therefore no proceedings could be carried out in the name of Rana Abdul Ghafoor who was not live at the time when the petition was filed. We further noted that even the suit for declaration and the appeal relied upon have been filed in the name of Rana Abdul Ghafoor and not in the name of the Appellant. So far as the Appellant is concerned, he has relied upon a general power of attorney which was filed in the writ petition and not in the ICA. As per the date of its execution that is 2.10.2003, it is evident that the said document could not have been executed by Rana Abdul Ghafoor who died on 14.7.2001. In this regard copy of his death certificate has been placed on the file. Furthermore the Appellant's stance that he had agreed to purchase the property from Rana Abdul Ghafoor is also without any merit because no right is conferred on the Appellant through an agreement to sell. Therefore the learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition. Under the circumstances, we find no illegality in the impugned order.
5. In view of the aforesaid, the instant appeal is dismissed and impugned order dated 17.11.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No, 13857/2014 is maintained.