Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: SARDARA AND OTHERS VS Respondent: NAZIR AND OTHERS
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Gul Muhammad Khan Title: SARDARA AND OTHERS vs NAZIR AND OTHERS Case No.: Writ Petition No, 3426 of 1978 Date of Judgment:1981-10-16 Reported As: 1983 CLC 2949 Result: Petition dismissed
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT ' The petitioners who are tenants were ejected by the Assistant Commissioner, vide his order dated 2nd March, 1978 under the Punjab Land Reforms (Procedure of Ejectment Suits) Rules, 1977. They took a time-barred appeal before the Additional Commissioner. He treated the same as a revision petition and dismissed it as barred by time and for the reason that it was not sufficiently stamped, under rule 7 of the above said. Rules. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel that as the Additional Commissioner had treated the petitioners' appeal as revision petition, he could not have dismissed the same. This contention has no force, as rule 7 of the Rules does provide' 15 days even for a revision petition for an aggrieved person. Undoubtedly, the revision petition was also beyond that period. In this view of the matter, it cannot be said that the order of the Additional Commissioner is without lawful authority. ' This petition, therefore, has no merit and is dismissed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.