Pakistan Case Law← Search
1987 SCMR 446

AKHUNZADA SAEEDUL HASSAN vs Qazi GHULAM DASTGIR Through His Legal Heirs And Other

Citation1987 SCMR 446
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Judge(s)Nasim Hasan Shah, Ali Hussain Qazilbash, Dr. Javed Iqbal, Muhammad
ResultAppeal disposed of

1. MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.--In the High Court, the dispute a related to the ownership of land measuring 11 Chakoram situate in village Broze, Chitral, in respect of which there was a compromise between the parties on 14th of June, 1954.

2. This compromise reflected that the appellant agreed to the retention Chakoram of land by the sons of Capt. Azizul Mulk, respondents 2 to 4 in the writ petition, while they would give up their claim to the remaining land in favour of the appellant in the appeal.

3. The High Court accepted the compromise although the appellant disputed its genuineness 28 years after its execution; with the result that ail actions taken pursuant to the order of the Land Inquiry Commission, dated 6th of September, 1972, were declared as without lawful authority. There was also a further direction that the S.D. A., Chitral and Deputy Commissioner, Chitral, should not interfere with the possession of the petitioners namely, Qazi Ghulam Dastgir, deceased, represented now by his legal representatives and Khadim Dastgir, who are now respondents in this appeal. The respondents 2 to 4 in the writ petition also conceded before the High Court that they were not in a position to controvert the stand taken by the petitioners, who are now the contesting respondents. These respondents, in this appeal, are also ex-parte, and, therefore, not interested in the dispute as they have not taken any steps to contest the matter.' The learned counsel for the respondent has referred us to a compromise entered into by the appellant and the contesting respondents, dated 29th of May, 1980, by which he had settled the dispute. His son Ghulam Hassan was present in Court and admitted his father's signatures, on the document. Qazi Ghulam Dastgir, respondent No. 2, has given a statement duly authenticated by his counsel to resolve the dispute in' terms of the apprehension shown by Ghulam Hassan.

4. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise, dated 29th of May, 1980, and the statement of respondent No. 2 Qazi Ghulam Dastgir, dated 8-12-1986, but with no order as to costs.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search