Hafiz MOHKAM UD DIN vs SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (L) AND 2 Other
This petition for special leave to appeal arises from an order of the Lahore High Court, which quashed proceedings initiated by the petitioner against the respondents under sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958. The core legal question was whether the petitioner could utilize the provisions of the Act to reopen property disputes that had already been adjudicated against him by the Additional Settlement Commissioner and the Chief Settlement Commissioner. The High Court found that the petitioner, having failed in previous contests, was attempting to relitigate settled matters through a mukhbari application without demonstrating any fraud or misrepresentation by the respondents. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, dismissing the petition in limine. The Court affirmed the principle that proceedings under the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958, are to be used sparingly and only when the Settlement Authorities are satisfied, upon examination of the record, that they have been defrauded. Consequently, the Court refused to interfere with the High Court's order, noting that the facts did not warrant such intervention.
- Can a party use a mukhbari application to reopen property disputes already decided by the Settlement Authorities?
- Under what circumstances should proceedings under sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958 be initiated?
- Is it improper to initiate proceedings under the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958, in the absence of fraud or misrepresentation?
- Section 10, Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958
- Section 11, Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958
ORDER
1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--Lahore High Court has quashed proceedings against respondents Nos. 1 and 2 under sections 10 and 11 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act, 1958, which were initiated by Hafiz Mohkam--ud-4in, petitioner herein, who now seeks special leave to appeal.
2. The main reason that prevailed with the High Court was that have lost in the contest, against the respondents in respect of the property in dispute, the petitioner resorted to a mukhbari application so as to reopen the same questions which were decided against him by the Additional Settlement Commissioner and the Chief Settlement Commissioner, in revision. Learned counsel appearing for the Settlement Department before the High Court was also unable toshow that the respondents had committed any fraud or misrepresentation so as to justify the initiation of proceedings against them and, therefore, the High Court held that it was "highly improper to reopen the case under these provisions", which "are to be used very sparingly and only in case where the Settlement Authorities are satisfied, after examination of record, that they have been defrauded.
3. In almost similar circumstances, this Court in C. P. S. L. A. NO. 4711of 1975, Syed Dilber Hussain v. Dr. Syed Ahmad Jamalullah and others refused to interfere with similar order passed by Lahore High Court, and we are clearly of the view that the facts of the present case also do not warrant interference by this Court.
4. The petition is, therefore, dismissed in limine.