MUHAMMAD ZAHOOR NASIR and others vs ADDITIONAL DEPUTY
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, arising from a long-standing dispute over the jurisdiction of settlement authorities regarding evacuee property. The core legal questions involve the proper interpretation of the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975, specifically regarding the territorial jurisdiction of the Additional Settlement Commissioner (Ind. Rural) in Sindh over property located in the Punjab province, and whether the relevant authorities complied with previous remand orders. The Court also examines the applicability of the doctrine of lis pendens under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the nature of a prior judgment as being in rem or in personam. Upon reviewing the record and the impugned judgment, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, converting the petitions into appeals. The Court held that the complex issues regarding jurisdiction, the interpretation of the Repeal Act, and the standing of the petitioner as a vendee required a full hearing. Consequently, the Court ordered that the status quo be maintained pending the final adjudication of the appeals.
- Whether the Additional Settlement Commissioner of one province has jurisdiction to adjudicate matters concerning evacuee property located in another province under the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975?
- Does the principle of lis pendens under section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, apply to proceedings involving the transfer of evacuee property?
- Whether a vendee has the locus standi to challenge the cancellation of an entitlement certificate originally issued to a third party?
- Section 2, Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975
- Section 3, Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975
- Section 4, Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975
- Section 52, Transfer of Property Act, 1882
ORDER
1. ' JAVED IQBAL, J.--- After having heard Mian Fazal Mahmood learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioners, and Mr. A. Karim Malik, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court, Mr. Tahir Munir Malik, learned Advocate Supreme Court, Mr. Ihsanul Haq Chaudhry, learned Advocate Supreme Court for respondents, scanning the entire record and perusing the judgment impugned, we are inclined to grant leave to in the above captioned petitions, inter alia, on the following points:--
(i) Whether the judgment impugned is in accordance with law as laid down in Nawab Sayed Raunaq Ali v. Chief Settlement Commissioner PLD 1973 SC 236, Majidullah Khan v. N.-W.F.P.
2. 1980. SCMR 728, Barkat Ali v. Bashir Ahmad 1980 SCM R 731, Yousuf Ali v. Muhammad Aslam Zia PLD 1958 SC (Pak.) 104, Faqir Muhammad Punjabi v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1958 SC (Pak.) 118, Muhammad Tufail v. Abdul Ghafoor PLD 1958 SC (Pak.) 201, Atta Muhammad Qureshi v. Settlement Commissioner PLD 1971 SC 61, Muhammad Ramzan v. Member (Rev) CSS 1997 SCM R 1635.
(ii) Whether the provisions as contained in sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975 have been misconstrued and misinterpreted qua the determination of jurisdiction of forum concerned in the hierarchy of Settlement laws in view of verification of claim and completion of necessary formalities in the Province of Sindh whereas the property in question is located in the Province of Punjab.
(iii) Whether the principles as embodied in section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, would have some bearing on the fate of the case.
(iv) Whether the remand order passed in Writ Petition No,521-R of 1966, dated 8-11-1973 has been complied with substantially by Officer authorized under section 2(2) of the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975 Additional Settlement Commissioner (Ind. Rural) Central Settlement Cell, Board of Revenue Sindh (Hyderabad).
(v) Whether the judgment, dated 8-11-1973 passed in Writ Petition No, 521-R of 1966 can be considered as judgment in Rem or in Personam.
(vi) Whether the Additional Settlement Commissioner (Ind. Rural) Central Settlement Cell, Board of Revenue Sindh (Hyderabad) had no jurisdiction qua the subject-matter while passing order, dated 29-5-1976 in view of the notification, dated 8-5-1976 issued under subsection (2) of section 2 of the Evacuee Property and Displaced Persons (Repeal) Act, 1975 by the Governor of Punjab whereby Muhammad Siddique Chaudhry, Member Board of Revenue Punjab as Chief Settlement Commissioner, Rehabilitation Commissioner and Claim Commissioner for the Province of Punjab for the disposal of pending proceedings under the Repeal Laws.
(vii) Whether the petitioner being a vendee had any locus standi tochallenge the cancellation of entitlementcertificate of Shahabuddin.
3. ' The above petitions are converted into appeals which may be fixed at some early date in view of the chequered history of the case and prolonged litigation. The Status quo shall maintain till decision of the appeals.