PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 1224 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Syed KASHIF HUSSAIN SHAH vs OMBUDSPERSON (MOHTASIB) PUNJAB S — 2024 YLR 1224 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2024 YLR 1224 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Citation Name: 2024 YLR 1224 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Syed KASHIF HUSSAIN SHAH vs OMBUDSPERSON (MOHTASIB) PUNJAB S
Subject matter
Constitutional
Provisions referred to
S. 7---C; S. 7; Property Rights Act

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

Judgment text as reported

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 1224 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case Syed KASHIF HUSSAIN SHAH VS OMBUDSPERSON (MOHTASIB) PUNJAB S. 7---Complaint to Ombudsperson (Mohtasib) in case proceedings in a Court of law---Ombudsperson (Mohtasib) Punjab---Jurisdiction---Report in terms of S. 7(3) of the Punjab Woman Enforcement of Property Rights Act, 2021 submitted by the Ombudsperson (Mohtasib) with the concerned Civil Court, but no response was received, whereafter Ombudsperson (Mohtasib) proceeded to decide the complaint---Petitioners invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court against the decision passed by the Ombudsperson (Mohtasib) on the complaint of the private respondents---Contention of the petitioners was that parties to the civil suit(s) were neither impleaded as party to the complaint nor were heard before ordering partition of the property owned by the parties---Validity---Civil Courts where civil suits are pending are required to respond to the report, failing which Ombudsperson (Mohtasib) had to proceed in accordance with the jurisdiction conferred as the exercise of such jurisdiction cannot be stalled or held in abeyance merely because the concerned Court is not responding to the report---However, in the present case, partition of property was ordered by the Ombudsperson (Mohtasib) merely because partition proceedings otherwise pending before the Tehsildar, were adjourned sine die, for which the complainants (private respondents) failed to justify that, merely on sait fact, per se jurisdiction was exercisable by the Ombudsperson (Mohtasib)---Further, no discussion was found in the impugned order regarding the scope of civil suit filed by the complainants themselves, which proceedings were still pending---Impugned order passed by the Ombudsperson (Mohtasib) was deficient on various counts---High Court set-aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Ombudsperson (Mohtasib) to decide the same afresh while observing necessary steps like impleadment of parties in the complaint, issuing notices etc.---Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English