Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: NIAZ ALI and other VS Respondent: SULTAN ALI and other
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Nasim Hasan Shah, Aslam Riaz Hussain Title: NIAZ ALI and other vs SULTAN ALI and other Case No.:Civil Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 225 and 412 of 1980 I.C.A.
No,161 of 1979 and I.C.A. No,160 of 1979 Date of Judgment:1983-10-10 Reported As: 1984 SCMR 1542 Result: Leave refused Judgment ORDER ' ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-- This order will dispose of two petitions namely (i) C.P.S.L.A. No,225/80 filed by Niaz Ali and another, (ii) C.P.S.L.A. No,412/80 filed by Riaz Ali and another, against the dismissal by the High Court, of their I.C.As. (No,161/79 and 160/79) respectively, the main judgment having been recorded in I.C.A. No,160/79 on 6-11-1979. 2. The facts giving rise to these petitions are, briefly, that they filed mukhbari applications against Sultan All respondent No,1 (in C.P. No,225/80) and Sardar respondent No,1 (in C.P. No,412/80) in Village Zafarwal against their claims. The said mukhbari applications were, however, dismissed. Feeling aggrieved the petitioners challenged the orders of dismissal through writ petitions in the High Court but these were also dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the said Court by the same order, dated 24-4-1979. They then filed two separate I.C.As which too, were dismissed by a Division Bench of the said High Court vide the impugned judgment. ' Hence the present petitions. 3. We have heard the petitioners' counsel at some length. We notice that petitioner's mukhbari applications in these cases were not only rejected by the Settlement authorities but they did not succeed before the High Court either. Even before us the learned counsel has not been able to make out any good ground for interference with the impugned judgment. Leave is, therefore, refused in both the petitions.