DISTURBED PERSONS REHABILITATION ORDINANCE, 1964

 

DISTURBED PERSONS REHABILITATION
ORDINANCE, 1964 (I OF 1964)

 

Section—4

 

Prior Iermission for
registration—Prior permission of specified authority for registration of a
deed of transfer of immovable property by a member of the minority community
Section 4 having been declared ultra vires of the Constitution. view taken by
the High Court Division — Supreme Court pending hearing of appeal stayed
operation of judgment of the High Court — Deed of transfer registered without
requisite permission during the period the operation of judgment of the High
Court remained stayed — Whether the transfer in the absence of permission valid
— Constitution of Pakistan (1962). Arts, 6, 58, and 93 and Fundamental Right
No. 13.

Ful Ghand Das and others Vs. Mohainmad Haininad and others; 3BLD
(AD)68.

Ref: 17 DLR (Dacca) 451; (1929) 278 US 515; N.S. Bindra:
Interpretation of statutes (Sixth Edition) Page 592.

 

Section—4

Limitation—Limitation
in a suit for specific performance of contract—When it will start ? —Whether
limitation will run from the expiry of the period mentioned in the notice by
the plaintiff to the defendant to perform the contract after obtaining
necessary permission for execution and registration of the sale deed or from
the expiry of the Ordinance putting embargo on execution and registration of
the sale deed with permission—Upon true construction of the relevant clause of
the agreement it would appear that the plaintiff could ask for the deed amicably
or through Court both after the expiry of the Ordinance and during the
continuance of the Ordinance upon fulfilling conditions thereof — Finding as to
limitation that the suit filed within three years from the expiry of the
Ordinance is justified — — Limitation Act (IX of 1908) Art. 113.

Rustain Dhali and others V.c. Sekander Dhali and others; 7BLD(AD)15i

 

Section—6A

Forfeiture and
settlement after expiry of the Ordinance whether valid and legal — — Suit
property forfeited and settled by the Deputy Commissioner on 27th and 30th
October, 1969 respectively under the Disturbed Persons (Rehabilitation)
Ordinance of 19M which expired on and from 1st April. 1969— Forfeiture and
settlement held illegal.

Alim Mohammad Vs.
Tamizuddia, 4BLD (HCD) 71DRUGS (CONTROL) ORDINANCE (VII OF 1982)

 

Section—6

Cancellation of the
registration of medicines — Whether licencing authority without
recommendation from the Drug Control Committee can cancel registration of
medicines — The licencing authority has no independent power to cancel the
registration of medicines — It can only do so when such cancellation is
recommended by the Drug Control Committee — The petitioners is also entitled to
a show cause notice and a hearing before the licencing authority before the
registration of his medicines is cancelled — Without following these
procedures. the Iicencing authority cannot arbitrarily and unilaterally cancel
the registration of the petitioner’s registration of medicines.

Ruhul Ainin Vs. The Director, Drug Administration and Licencing
Authority (Drugs); 7BLD (HCD) 182

 

Disclaimer:

The information contains in this web-site is prepared for educational purpose. This site may be used by the students, faculties, independent learners and the learned advocates of all over the world. Researchers all over the world have the access to upload their writes up in this site. In consideration of the people’s participation in the Web Page, the individual, group, organization, business, spectator, or other, does hereby release and forever discharge the Lawyers & Jurists, and its officers, board, and employees, jointly and severally from any and all actions, causes of actions, claims and demands for, upon or by reason of any damage, loss or injury, which hereafter may be sustained by participating their work in the Web Page. This release extends and applies to, and also covers and includes, all unknown, unforeseen, unanticipated and unsuspected injuries, damages, loss and liability and the consequences thereof, as well as those now disclosed and known to exist.  The provisions of any state’s law providing substance that releases shall not extend to claims, demands, injuries, or damages which are known or unsuspected to exist at this time, to the person executing such release, are hereby expressly waived. However the Lawyers & Jurists makes no warranty expressed or implied or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product process or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favouring by the Lawyers & Jurists. The views and opinions of the authors expressed in the Web site do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Lawyers & Jurists. Above all, if there is any complaint drop by any independent user to the admin for any contents of this site, the Lawyers & Jurists would remove this immediately from its site.