3. Avowing the findings recorded by the learned Courts below in the impugned judgments, the learned counsel for the respondents No.1 to 5 has argued that the revenue authorities have not changed the verdict of the Civil Court dated 16.06.1956, rather have made correction with regard to implementation of the same in its true spirit and the revenue Courts enjoy ample jurisdiction under section 172(2)(vi) of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967 in this respect; therefore, the learned Courts below have rightly reached to the conclusion and have rightly non-suited the petitioner. The impugned judgments and decrees being well-versed and wellbalanced do not call for any interference in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction as both the learned Court below have exercised vested jurisdiction in an apt way. Dismissal of the instant revision petition has been prayed for. Relies on Dilmir and others v. Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and 9 others (PLD 1991 Lahore 314), Malik Muhammad Nawaz and others v. Malik Hameedullah etc. (PLJ 2001 Revnue 5) and Dildar Ahmad and others v. Member (Judicial-III) BOR, Punjab, Lahore and another (2013 SCMR 906).
Part of Judgment
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE.
Civil Revision-Civil Revision(Against Decree)
1386-11
0 comments:
Post a Comment