FAZAL MUHAMMAD and others vs ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (REV.) and others
This civil petition before the Supreme Court of Pakistan was directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, dismissing the petitioners' constitutional petition against an order of the Additional Commissioner (Revenue)/Notified Officer. The core dispute pertained to the allotment of evacuee lands under Claim Forms Nos. 106 and 307. Scrutiny and a report from the Central Record Office revealed that the claim forms had been tampered with to illegally enhance the claimants' entitlement, bogus documents were procured, and a double fraud was committed to secure the allotments. The petitioners had subsequently purchased the disputed lands from these original claimants. The Supreme Court held that since the original allotments obtained by the vendors were fraudulent and bogus, the subsequent purchasers must sink with their vendors. Upholding the concurrent findings of fact, the Court held that the orders suffered from no illegality, misreading, or non-reading of material evidence, and consequently dismissed the petition for lack of merit.
- Whether subsequent purchasers retain any valid title or legal protection when the original allotment in favour of their vendors is found to be bogus and fraudulent?
- Can concurrent findings of fact regarding fraudulent land allotment be interfered with in the absence of misreading or non-reading of material evidence?
- What is the legal effect of tampered claim forms and bogus documents verified by the Central Record Office on land allotments made thereunder?
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.-- This petition is directed against the judgment dated 28.4.2000 of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur, through which constitutional petition filed by the petitioners against the order dated 2.6.1990 of the Additional Commissioner (Revenue)/Notified Officer, Bahawalpur Division, Bahawalpur has been dismissed.
2. The dispute relates to allotment of evacuee lands made against Claim Forms Nos.106 and 307.
The matter came up for scrutiny of these claims in order to determine the extent of entitlement of the claimants twice before the Additional Settlement Commissioner (Revenue) as per order dated 2.6.1990. Report from the Central Record Office was also called which reported that in addition to tempering with the said claim forms to enhance the entitlement of the claimants as regards Chai Lands, bogus documents were also obtained in excess of the entitlement at one or two places., There was double fraud committed according to the learned Judge of the High Court in obtaining allotment against these claims by the claimants from whom the petitioners had purchased the land.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that record was not examined by the learned Additional Commissioner before arriving at the conclusion of facts. We have noticed that the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, was challenged in the writ petition and a report was called from the Central Record Office and thereafter the order was passed.
4. Since the original allotments made in favour of the claimants were found to be bogus, therefore, the petitioners who are purchasers from them were also to sink with them.
5. The judgment passed by the learned Judge of the High Court impugned in this petition dated 28.4.2000 and order of the Additional Commissioner (Revenue) dated 2.6.1990 have not been shown to have suffered from any illegality. A finding of fact has been recorded against the petitioners to which no exception can be taken as no case of misreading or non-reading of any material piece of evidence has been made out.
6. For the foregoing reasons this petition has no merits which is accordingly, dismissed and .