Muhammad Hanif And Other vs Lal Khan
The petitioners sought leave to appeal against a Lahore High Court judgment that upheld the validity of a sale deed and mutation, which had been challenged by the petitioners on the basis of alleged violations of the Land Reforms Regulation (MLR 64 of 1959). The core legal questions presented were whether the Civil Court possessed the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon matters concerning the violation of the Land Reforms Regulation, specifically in light of the exclusionary provisions contained in paragraphs 25 and 27 of said Regulation, and whether the respondents were required to exhaust statutory remedies under the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967, before invoking the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to challenge the Revenue Officer's order reviewing the mutation. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine these contentions, specifically focusing on the jurisdictional limits of the Civil Court regarding land reform matters and the necessity of exhausting administrative remedies under the revenue laws before seeking judicial intervention. The matter remains pending for final adjudication on these specific legal points.
- Does the Civil Court have jurisdiction to determine violations of the Land Reforms Regulation (MLR 64 of 1959) given the bars in paragraphs 25 and 27?
- Must a party exhaust statutory remedies under the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967, before challenging a Revenue Officer's order in a Civil Court?
- Paragraph 25, Land Reforms Regulation (MLR 64 of 1959)
- Paragraph 27, Land Reforms Regulation (MLR 64 of 1959)
- West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967
ORDER FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J-- The petitioners seek leave to appeal against judgment dated 4.10.1999 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Regular Second Appeal No. 76 of 1978.
2. The facts of the case are that late Jani predecessor- in-interest of the petitioners was owner of agricultural land measuring 103 kanals and 8 marlas situate at Chak No. 486/GB, Tehsii Samundri, District Faisalabad. He sold his 93/2068 share in favour of the respondents through a registered sale-deed dated 21.1.1967. Mutation No. 210 was accordingly sanctioned by the Assistant Collector.
Late Jani filed a suit for declaration in respect of a separate piece of land in Square No. 29, Killa No. 1112 which was decreed by the Civil Court-on 14.6.1967 pursuant to special Oath taken by petitioner No. 1. The Revenue Officer concerned, by order dated 21.4.1968 reviewed the sale mutation No. 210 on the ground of violation of the provisions of the Land Reforms Regulation (MLR 64 of 1959) as a case of partial sale. Therefore, the respondents filed a civil suit for declaration that the sale-deed dated 21.1.1967 and the mutation No. 210 were valid and that the order dated 21.4.1968 of review of mutation by the Revenue Officer was without jurisdiction. The civil suit of the respondents was decreed by the Civil Judge on 20.10.1975 The first appeal and the regular second appeal of the petitioners were dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Faisalabad and the Lahore High Court, Lahore respectively vide judgments dated 8.1.1978 and 4.10.1999. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. The learned counsel, inter alia, argued 'that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to determine the question of violation or otherwise of the provisions of the Land Reforms Regulation, in view of paragraphs Nos. 25 and 27 of the said Regulation, lt was further argued that without exhausting the statutory remedies provided by the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967, the respondents could not invoke the jurisdiction of the Civil Court against the order of review of mutation passed by the Revenue Officer.
4. Leave is granted to consider the above contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners.