Property Tribunal asked to act against police over alleged defiance of order

Hameed Ullah, through his counsel Advocate Waqas Rasheed Sandhu, filed an application under Sections 9 and 13 of the Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immovable Property

LAHORE: An applicant has approached the Punjab Property Tribunal in Lahore, seeking action against police officials over alleged non-compliance with an order concerning a disputed residential property and requesting that the complete record of proceedings initiated after the filing of his complaint be summoned.

Hameed Ullah, through his counsel Advocate Waqas Rasheed Sandhu, filed an application under Sections 9 and 13 of the Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immovable Property Amended Act, 2026, before the Special Judge, Punjab Property Tribunal, Lahore.

The applicant stated that the tribunal had taken cognizance of his complaint under Section 7 of the Act and, through an order dated August 18, directed the concerned Station House Officer to attach the disputed house to prevent any law-and-order situation and ensure that no person interfered with its position or possession.

According to the application, the applicant alleged that the Superintendent of Police (Operations), Model Town Division, and the SHO of Police Station Kahna failed to properly implement the tribunal’s order. He claimed that the compliance report submitted by the police was unsatisfactory, biased and based on facts that, according to him, did not accurately reflect the situation.

The applicant further alleged that police officials acted in coordination with two private respondents involved in the property dispute. He claimed that after the tribunal took cognizance of the matter, the police entertained a separate application submitted by one of the private respondents and summoned him along with the person from whom he had purchased the property.

The applicant alleged that they were pressured to withdraw the complaint and were warned that criminal proceedings could otherwise be initiated against them. These allegations, however, remain claims made in the application and have not been established by the tribunal.

The application also refers to a disputed agreement allegedly produced by one of the private respondents in support of his claim over the property. The applicant maintained that the document was fraudulent and said that the seller, identified as Faqir Hussain, had approached the Lahore CCPO seeking registration of a criminal case over the alleged document.

The applicant claimed that the matter was subsequently entrusted to the SP Investigation, Model Town, Lahore, but alleged that another police proceeding was initiated without properly disclosing that the issue was already under investigation.

He further alleged that attempts were made to obtain the original title documents, property file and records relating to bank payments, which he claimed could affect the proceedings pending before the tribunal.

The applicant argued that, after the tribunal had assumed jurisdiction over the matter, the police authorities should not initiate proceedings that could prejudice or interfere with the property dispute before the court. He requested the tribunal to summon the relevant records from the police authorities and examine the proceedings conducted after the filing of his complaint.

He also urged the tribunal to direct the concerned authorities to strictly comply with the August 18 order and refrain from taking any action concerning the subject matter of the proceedings without lawful authority.

The applicant has further requested that the concerned officials be summoned personally and proceeded against in accordance with law if the tribunal finds that its order was deliberately violated.

The application was accompanied by an affidavit submitted by Hameed Ullah, in which he affirmed that the contents of his application were true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief and that no material fact had been concealed.

The tribunal has been requested to grant any other relief it considers appropriate in the circumstances of the case.