GULAB DIN vs SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, LAHORE DIVISION LAHORE AND Other
This petition for leave to appeal arises from a judgment of the High Court dismissing a writ petition concerning the settlement and division of a 54 feet long verandah attached to a property in Chawinda, District Sialkot, which was transferred in portions to the petitioner and respondent No. 3. The core legal question was whether the High Court or this Court should interfere with the equal division of the verandah made by the Settlement Authorities. The Supreme Court held that since the Settlement Officer possessed the jurisdiction to divide the disputed area, and the matter was a petty dispute not involving any substantial question of law, interference was unwarranted. The Court laid down the principle that discretionary constitutional jurisdiction will not be exercised to examine the factual correctness or propriety of a minor property division made by a competent settlement authority acting within its jurisdiction.
- Will the Supreme Court interfere with a factual property division made by a Settlement Officer having jurisdiction?
- Does a petty dispute not involving any question of law warrant interference in writ jurisdiction?
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J. The petitioner seeks Leave to Appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court, dated 4-12-1975, dismissing his writ petition in a settlement matter.
The dispute relates to 54 feet long verandah/thara attached to the house No. 1/2 Chawinda (District Sialkot). The said house has been transferred to Gulab Din petitioner and Feroze Din respondent No. 3 in almost equal portions. The Settlement Authorities also equally divided the area of the verandah between the said parties
2. The petitioner submits that since the entire verandah adjoins the portion of the house transferred to him (shown in blue pencil on the attached site plan called for by us through the Deputy Settlement Commissioner whole is present in Court) the same should have, been transferred to him, to they exclusion of Feroze Din respondent. Although his submission is correct yet since the Settlement Officer who divided the verandah in dispute had the jurisdiction to do so we do not wish to go into the correctness or propriety of the division made by him. Moreover, it is a petty matter which does not involve any question of law.
3. The petition is, therefore, dismissed us being without any merit. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.