DEWAN KHAN vs DEPUTY SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, MULTAN And Other
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed an Intra-Court Appeal regarding the transfer of urban property under settlement laws. The core legal question was whether the findings of fact made by the Deputy Settlement Commissioner—specifically regarding the respondents' submission of transfer applications and their possession of the disputed property—were legally sustainable. The petitioner, a non-claimant in possession of part of the property, challenged the transfer to the respondents, who were claimants. The Supreme Court observed that the Deputy Settlement Commissioner had relied on valid evidence, including a certificate confirming the respondents' application and findings that the respondents held possession through a licensee. The High Court had previously upheld these findings, noting the petitioner's failure to rebut the evidence. The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's decision, holding that findings of fact based on material evidence cannot be interfered with in constitutional jurisdiction when the petitioner fails to produce contrary proof. The principle laid down is that factual findings supported by record evidence are not subject to reappraisal in constitutional jurisdiction absent compelling evidence to the contrary.
- Can findings of fact made by a Deputy Settlement Commissioner be interfered with in constitutional jurisdiction when supported by evidence?
- Does a claimant have preference over a non-claimant in the transfer of indivisible urban property under settlement law?
- Is possession through a licensee sufficient to establish possession for the purpose of property transfer under settlement law?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.-- Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment, dated 27-9- 1980 of the Lahore High Court; whereby an Intra-Court Appeal arising out of an urban settlement case filed by the petitioner, was dismissed.
2. After to rounds of litigation the property in dispute was transferred to respondents Nos 2 and 3 on the ground that although the petitioner a non-claimant is also in possession of a part of the property, the respondents being claimants would have preference over him and the building being indivisible, it was transferred to the said to respondents. Two questions of fact were raised before the High Court; One, that the respondents had not submitted any application for transfer and secondly that they were not in possession of any part of the property. The Deputy Settlement Commissioner who dealt with the case after a remand order by the High Court gave findings of fact against the petitioner on both the points. Regarding the submission of the forms reliance was placed on a certificate/ receipt issued by the office of the concerned D.S.C. Showing that the respondent had applied for transfer and with regard to possession it was held that the respondents were in possession of a part of the property through one Muhammad Yasin, their licensee. Learned counsel for the petitioner had explained that this Mohammad Yasin is an uncle of the respondents. The learned Judges in the High Court-- in the Single and in the Division Benches-- upheld the findings of fact by the D.S.C. And declined relief to the petitioner in the Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court.
3. Learned counsel has tried to show that the findings of fact by the D.S.C. Are not based on any sound material. The learned Single Judge in the High Court repelled similar contention by observing that the petitioner failed to produce any proof to show that the certificate/ receipt regarding the application for transfer submitted by the respondent was not genuine. We also asked the learned counsel to show any material to prove otherwise; but he failed to do so. Similarly there is nothing to rebut the finding that the respondents were in possession of the property in dispute through their licensee Muhammad Yasin who also happened to be their uncle. This petition accordingly fails and is dismissed.