Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2118 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs MUHAMM

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2118 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS MUHAMMAD ARIF KHAN (DECEASED) S. 115---Revision---Concurrent findings of facts by two Courts below---Effect---Where findings are based on mis-reading and non-reading of material evidence, misinterpretation and misconstruction of oral and documentary evidence and suffer from material illegality and jurisdictional error, exercise in revisional jurisdiction becomes necessary. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2118 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS MUHAMMAD ARIF KHAN (DECEASED) Ss. 54 & 56(d)---Suit for injunction---Government functions, restraining of---Respondents/plaintiffs were aggrieved of acquisition proceedings and sought permanent injunction against petitioner/Lahore Development Authority---Both the Courts below concurrently decided suit and appeal in favour of respondents/plaintiffs---Validity---Respondents/plaintiffs simply claimed permanent injunction which could be granted only if there were admitted rights either under a contract or under the statute, which were being violated---Respondents/plaintiffs failed to produce any proof of having been allowed adjustment of 06 Kanal and 13 Marla of residential unit and also failed to produce any record of adjustment---Respondents/plaintiffs could not simply sue for injunctive relief, particularly when such claim was disputed---Without seeking declaration of ownership of residential unit under sanction/approval of competent authority, suit for permanent injunction simpliciter was not maintainable---Land had been acquired, award was announced and Acquiring Authority or Land Acquisition Collector was to proceed with performance of statutory duties of taking over possession by removing encroachments for delivery of possession to persons who were entitled to have the same---No injunction could be granted to interfere with the performance of public duties of any department of Federal or Provincial Government in view of the bar under S. 56(d) of Specific Relief Act, 1877---Respondents/plaintiff did not produce exemption record nor any material or document was produced in evidence to prove that property was exempted/adjusted under Adjustment Policy, after compliance of legal formalities regarding pre-requisite for adjustment/exemption---Respondents/plaintiffs could not be granted any relief of injunction to restrain petitioners/Lahore Development Authority from performing their statutory duties---High Court set aside concurrent findings of facts by two Courts below as misreading and non-reading of oral as well as documentary evidence was made by the Courts below resulting into incorrect conclusions---High Court set aside judgment and decrees passed by two Courts below and dismissed the suit filed by respondents/plaintiffs as there was no admissible evidence to prove right of adjustment, application for its approval by competent authority, and compliance of preconditions for adjustment and payment of requisite charges for excess area---Revision was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2118 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs MUHAMMAD ARIF KHAN (DECEASED) S — 2023 MLD 2118 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 MLD