SHAMEEM HUSSAIN KADRI, J.-By this order we propose to dispose of L. P. A. Nos. 727 and 453 of 1966, filed by the two contestants in Writ Petitions Nos. 1184-R and 2531-R of 1962, which were dismissed by the learned Judge in Chambers by his order dated 2nd March, 1966.
2. The dispute relates to the transfer of House No. 1108-B, situate in Mohalla Jandiwala, Kamalia, District Lyallpur (now Faisalabad). Muhammad Suleman and Ahmad Bakhsh filed CH Forms for transfer of the property. The Deputy Settlement Commissioner by his orders dated 11th December.
1959, transferred the property according to their posses--sion. Ahmad Bakhsh was found to be in possession of a separate room of this building since 4th July, 1950 which as per site plan submitted by Mr. S.M. Zamir Zaidi has two openings, one in the main bazar and the other in the lane.
Muhammad Suleman claimed possession since 1948. His possession was regularized by a formal allotment on 24th February, 1951.
3. Aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner both the parties went in appeal claiming the whole house. Learned Additional Settlement Commissioner accepted the appeal of Muhammad Suleman and allowed him the whole house but rejected the claim of Ahmad Bakhsh by order dated 17th October, 1960. He found that Ahmad Bakhsh was a senior allottee but he was in possession of only one room while the rest of- the house was in prior possession of Muhammad Suleman. According to him Ahmad Bakhsh was not residing in the room but was using it for commercial purposes.
4. Ahmad Bakhsh went in revision, which was accepted, by Mir Ajam Khan, Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner, on 27th July, 1961. He, gave the room to him on the ground that he was a claimant allotee in possession. Ahmad Bakhsh filed a second revision claiming the whole house as an allottee. Sh. Muhammad Rafiq, Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner with powers of the Chief Settlement Commissioner dismissed the second revision on 8th May, 1962. Both the parties filed the above--mentioned writ petitions which met the same fate.
5. Mr. S. M. Zamir Zaidi, learned counsel for Muhammad Suleman in LPA 727/66 relied on Abdul Majid Khan v. The Chief Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner (1) and argued that the room transferred to Ahmad Bakhsh could not be called a self-contained residential unit since it bad no necessary amenities. He further submitted that room is a part of the house as baithak, which is being used as a shop by Ahmad Bakhsh, and his client is entitled to its transfer. It is pertinent to mention here that Ahmad Bakhsh has died and L.P.A. No. 453 of 1966 was filed by his legal heirs Muhammad Jamil, etc. The room is being used for commercial purposes and it could not be transferred on CH Form. First proviso to subsection (4) of section 2 of the Displaced Persons (Compensa--tion and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, confers authority on the Chief Settlement Commissioner., to declare a residential building consisting of more than one residential unit, in possession of several persons, as one house. It can be treated as a house only if it is declared so.
Except the Additional Settlement Commissioner all the public functionaries in the hierarchy of the Settlement Department have found the house divisible, therefore, the room in possession of Ahmad Bakhsh was treated as a separate unit. From the plan on the file of Writ Petition No. 2531-R of 1962 it is manifest that the room in possession of Ahmad Bakhsh has two openings, one in the main Bazar and the other in the by-lane. It has no opening either in the courtyard or deori of the house transferred to Muhammad Suleman. In his statement (Annexure 'R. 1') in Writ Petition No. 1184-R of 1962 Muhammad Suleman admitted that he was in possession of the house since 11th June, 1950, ,he got the house allotted in the name of Ahmad Bakhsh since he had also a baithak in another house. He also deposed that the baithak has no connection with the rest of the building.
6. The parties are related to each other and seem to be greedy who have tried to be clever to each other in securing the allotment at different places. And attempted to hoodwink the department.
They have not come with clean bands to this Court. The learned Judge has rightly dismissec their writ petitions.
7. The word 'unit' has been used as a term of art in the definition of the house. If Ahmad Bakhsh has been in possession of a room and enjoying residence therein without the amenities and also doing his business therein the other party cannot raise any grievance, for, in the modern world persons do live in one room due to shortage of accommoda- b tion and use it for different purposes. The other necessities of lifer are mostly met by the use of public baths and latrines. In most densely populated cities like Tokyo, New York and London only one room is normally available which is used for multi purposes and for several rooms there is a common toilet, which can only be used on payment by several persons.
8. For the foregoing reasons we find no merit in both the appeals, which are dismissed leaving the Fatties to hear- their own costs.