Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 506

AKHTAR ALI KHAN and anothers vs SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, PESHAWAR

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 506
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Appeal No.21‑P of 1976
Date1988-10-08
Judge(s)Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Ghulam Mujaddid and Saad Saood Jan
Authored byMuhammad Afzal Zullah
ResultAppeal dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This appeal, granted leave by the Supreme Court, challenged a Peshawar High Court judgment dated June 7, 1974, which dismissed a Constitutional Petition concerning the transfer of urban evacuee property. The property was initially transferred to appellant No. 1, then set aside, and subsequently transferred to respondent No. 5. The appellants' writ petition was dismissed by the High Court on two grounds: laches and the failure to implead the purchaser from respondent No. 5 as a necessary party. The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's decision, noting that the High Court was justified in refusing relief in its writ jurisdiction when all necessary parties were not impleaded. The Court emphasized that the respondents' written statement provided sufficient notice to the appellants regarding the existence of the second transferee, who was a necessary party. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the High Court's finding that the writ petition was rightly dismissed.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a High Court refuse relief in its writ jurisdiction if all necessary parties are not impleaded?
  • Does a written statement identifying an absent party constitute sufficient notice for the petitioner to implead them?
  • Is non-joinder of a necessary party a valid ground for dismissing a Constitutional Petition in writ jurisdiction?
Evacuee propertyConstitutional petitionWrit jurisdictionLachesNon-joinder of necessary partyTransfer of property

1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--This appeal through leave of the Court, is directed against the judgment dated 7th of June, 1974 of the Peshawar High Court, whereby a Constitutional Petition of the appellants regarding the transfer of an urban evacuee property to respondent No,5, was dismissed.

2. ' The property was first ordered to be transferred to appellant No,1 through the draw of lots. He attempted to transfer it to his wife-appellant No,2 but on challenge by the respondent No,4, his other estranged wife, the transfer to him itself was set aside as illegal. It was then transferred to respondent No,5. The appellants' Writ Petition failed in the High Court on grounds of: (1) lathes; and

(2) appellants' failure to implead the purchaser from respondent No,5, a necessary party.

3. ' We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants. His explanation regarding point No,2 is that the absent party being a son of respondent No,5 she could have protected his interests.

4. Notwithstanding this, he has admitted that in cases like the present one, the High Court could refuse relief in its writ jurisdiction if all the necessary parties were not impleaded.

5. The respondents' written statement was enough notice to the appellants that the second transferee was a necessary party. In the circumstances of the case, appellants' writ petition having rightly been dismissed, this appeal is also dismissed with no order as to costs.

Cited by 13 cases

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