MUHAMMAD HAYAT and another vs SARWAR KHAN through LRs. and others
This petition for leave to appeal arises out of a judgment of the Lahore High Court dismissing the petitioners' civil revision and affirming the concurrent findings of the lower courts. The core legal questions concern the binding nature of an agreement dated 22.5.1911 entered into between a father and his sons, and the legal effect of a Collector's order dated 29.5.1935 determining succession under the relevant land colonization statute. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether the High Court and lower courts erred in ignoring the said agreement and the final order of the Collector, and how the property devolves upon the death of the original grantees under the Colonization of Government Lands Act, 1912. The Court held that arguable points of law were made out and granted leave to appeal, directing the maintenance of status quo regarding the property in dispute.
- Whether the High Court erred in ignoring a final order passed by the Collector determining succession to an estate?
- Whether an agreement entered into between a father and his sons is binding on their successors-in-interest?
- How does property devolve upon the death of grantees under the Colonization of Government Lands Act, 1912?
- Sections 20 to 23, Colonization of Government Lands Act, 1912
MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL, J. This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 18.5.2001 whereby Civil Revision No. 420-D of 1984 of the petitioners was dismissed.
2. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that all the Courts erred' in ignoring the agreement between Allah Bakhsh (father) and Zaman, Ghulam Muhammad and Ahmad Khan (his sons) dated 22.5.1991 and the order of the Collector dated 29.5.1935, which could determine the fate of the case.
3. After hearing. The learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record, we grant leave to appeal, inter a/ia, to consider the following points:-
(i) Whether in view of the order passed by the Collector, Shahpur, District Sargodha dated 29.5.1935, whereby .Muhammad Afzal was held successor of the estate left by Muhammad Zaman, has the learned High Court not erred in ignoring the said order which had attained finality and held the field?
(ii) Whether the Courts below have not fallen into error by ignoring the agreement entered into by Allah Bakhsh and his three sons on 22.5.1911, which was acted upon in the lift time of Allah Bakhsh and his three sons and whether .It was not binding on the successor-in-interest of Zaman, Ghulam Muhammad and Ahmed, sons of Allah Bakhsh?
(i.e) Whether after the death of Allah Bakhsh his son Zaman died issueless while Ghulam Muhammad survived by his son Dost Muhammad and Ahmad survived by Sardara and after their death, the property would not devolve upon Muhammad Afzal under Sections 20 to 23 of the Colonization of Government Lands Act, 1912, as held by the Collector in his order dated 29.5.1935? ,
4. Meanwhile status quo shall be maintained. The Collector of the concerned District shall ensure the implementation of the status quo order.