Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MISRI KHAN VS Respondent: GHULAM MUHAMMAD
Court Name: Board of Revenue Judge(s): Mumtaz Beg Birlas Title: MISRI KHAN vs GHULAM MUHAMMAD Case No.: R.O.R. No. 52 of 1991 Date of Judgment:1993-01-09 Reported As: 1994 CLC 893 Result: Order accordingly
Judgment ORDER This revision petition filed under para 5, sub-para (7) of MLR 115, against order dated 17-2-1991 passed by Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Rawalpindi Division, whereby he rejected the revision petition of the petitioner and upheld order/decree dated 1-12-1990 passed by A.C./Collector, Chakwal, and that of A.C.I., Talagang dated 2-7-1990, was admitted vide order dated 30-3-1991 to consider the preliminary issue of jurisdiction. 2. 1 have heard the counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on 1990 M LD 1912 wherein the Honourable High Court has held that under rule 7(2) of the Punjab Land Reforms (Procedure for Ejectment Suits) Rules, 1977 only the Commissioner of the Division is competent to decide the revision petition in ejectment cases. The counsel for the respondent has not denied the ruling but contended that on account of A technicalities of law respondent may not be denied his valuable rights. After considering the arguments, I am of the view that the decision of Additional Commissioner (Revenue) is without jurisdiction and is not maintainable under the law. The same is set aside and the case is remanded to the Commissioner, Rawalpindi Division, for deciding the matter afresh after hearing the parties.