NIZAMUDDIN vs MUHAMMAD USMAN Ss — 2024 YLR 645 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

NIZAMUDDIN VS MUHAMMAD USMAN Ss. 7, 8 & 10---Suit for possession, injunction and damages---Evacuee trust property---Scope---Plaintiff filed a suit for possession, occupation charges, injunction and damages---Contention of plaintiff was that his father was tenant of a portion of the suit property and under the settlement scheme applied for transfer of the said property which was allowed upon payment of cost/fee as per assessment of Settlement Department, however due to dispute of Trust Department, the final order could not be issued; that father of the plaintiff allowed respondent No. 1 to live in a room as shelter till the time they made their own arrangements; that respondent No. 1 taking advantage of grace of father of the plaintiff secretly behind the back approached the office of respondent No. 2 and illegally, collusively and fraudulently in 1989 deposited rent from 1977 to 1989 for suit property in order to show that he was tenant of the Trust Department; that respondent No. 2 inspite of fact that it had no jurisdiction, on the application of respondent No. 7, illegally ordered to demolish old constructed room and ordered ejectment of plaintiffs from the premises in question---Plaintiffs filed Civil suit against the said orders, in which Trust Department made a statement that they were not ejecting the plaintiffs from the property in question---Court set aside the impugned orders of ejectment and demolishing the room---Respondent No. 1 shifted from the suit property but did not vacate the same---Suit of the plaintiff was dismissed by the Trial Court---Appellate Court also dismissed the appeal---Validity---Chairman, who was required to convince himself on the facts of the case and detailed records of property in question, passed the impugned order merely on the submission made by the Administrator Evacuee Trust Property where the land in question was declared as "Mandir" (where there was no trace of any such construction) and offered the respondents if they accepted sovereignty of the Trust Department, they would be sold out portions in the said land---Taking benefit of the order, the respondent No. 1 managed a rental agreement in his favour since the Supreme Court in the meanwhile had passed orders that no sale of P.T.D property could be made out---Since the said order had been passed under Ss. 8 & 10 of the Evacuee Trust Properties Management and Disposal Act, 1975, perusal of the said statue in general and its Sections in particular showed that law required that a property to be put in a Trust Pool (under Section 7) before any such order was to be placed, which compliance was missing and whereas superior Courts had held that in order to give a finding (under Section 8) that a property was an Evacuee Trust Property ("ETP"), such determination had to be supported by an overwhelming evidence on record---In the present case, the judgments of both the Courts were given on the basis of the order of Chairman which had been passed without considering any evidence, except by luring respondents that if they accepted sovereignty of the Department, they would be given a booty---Language of the order did not inspire any confidence of the Court---Process of declaring the property an Evacuee Trust Property had not been followed, resultantly such an arbitrary and malice-infested order could not be considered valid---Revision petition was allowed by setting aside impugned judgments and decrees of both the Courts below, in circumstances.

NIZAMUDDIN vs MUHAMMAD USMAN Ss — 2024 YLR 645 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR