Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 1419

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB vs MUHAMMAD AZAM

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 1419
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,1236 of 1983
Date1988-08-29
Judge(s)Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan
Authored bySaad Saood Jan
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The respondent leased land from the Building and Road Department, incurring an alleged debt of Rs. 4,549.87. The Provincial Government attempted to recover this sum as arrears of land revenue. The respondent challenged this recovery method through a civil suit. While the trial court dismissed the suit, the Additional District Judge decreed it in the respondent's favor, a decision upheld by the High Court in a second appeal. The Provincial Government sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The core legal question was whether lease money owed to the Building and Road Department could lawfully be recovered as arrears of land revenue. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the Provincial Government failed to identify any statutory authority permitting the recovery of such lease money as arrears of land revenue. The judgment affirms that the state cannot invoke the summary procedure for recovering land revenue arrears without explicit statutory authorization for the specific debt in question.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can lease money owed to the Building and Road Department be recovered as arrears of land revenue?
  • Is the Provincial Government required to cite specific statutory authority to recover debts as arrears of land revenue?
arrears of land revenuelease money recoverycivil suitstatutory authorityProvincial Government

ORDER

' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The respondent obtained some land on lease from the Building and Road Department. An amount of Rs,4,549.87 became allegedly due from him under the lease. The Provincial Government sought to recover this amount as arrears of land revenue. The respondent filed a civil suit to challenge his liability and the mode of recovery. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court but in appeal it was decreed by the Additional District Judge. The Provincial Government filed a second appeal in the High Court but it failed. It now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.

2. The only question for consideration in this petition is whether the lease money could be recovered as arrears of land revenue. The learned counsel appearing for the Provincial Government was unable to cite any law under which this mode of recovery could be adopted to recover the amount in question as arrears of land revenue. We would therefore dismiss this petition. We would however, like to find out the expenses of all nature which the Provincial Government has incurred so far in this matter till today. The learned counsel should get a statement prepared and send it to the Registrar of this Court.

Cited by 4 cases

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