| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 2898 2004 SLD 2898 2004 PLD 771 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 1736 and 1737 of 1999 decided on 26th May, 2004. (On appeal from the judgment dated 5-10-1999 passed by the more High Court in Civil Revisions Nos. 8 and 9 of 1995).
HAMID ALI MIRZA AND SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, JJ
Hasnat Ahmed Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Rana Muhammad Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents,
Respondent No. 3. Ex parte
Civil Appeals Nos. 1736 and 1737 of 1999 decided on 26th May, 2004. (On appeal from the judgment dated 5-10-1999 passed by the more High Court in Civil Revisions Nos. 8 and 9 of 1995).
HAMID ALI MIRZA AND SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, JJ
Hasnat Ahmed Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Rana Muhammad Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents,
Respondent No. 3. Ex parte
ABDULLAH SHAH
VS
SARDAR ALI and others
Law:
Section:
Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991)-- -----Ss. 113 & 6---Pre-emption suit---Making of Talb-i-Ishhad---Failure to form Talb-i-Ishhad by sending registered notice to the vendee and contradictions among the witnesses qua the performance of said Talb--Evidence, in the present case was discrepant and the person originally having been mentioned in the plaint as witness to Talb-i-Ishhad was abandoned by the pre-emptor and was produced in defence by the vendee who totally disproved the incident of Talb-i-Ishhad having ever been made or having ever been witnessed by him--Contention of the preemtor, by referring to proviso to subsection (3) of S.13 of Punjab Preemption Act, 1991, was that pre-emptor was exempted from making Talb-i-Ishhad through a registered notice and it was sufficient for him to have made the said Talb in the presence of two truthful witnesses--Validity---Proviso to S.13(3) of the Act was to the effect that in area where, due to lack of postal facility, it was not possible for the pre-emptor to give registered notice, he could make Talb-i-Ishhad in the 'Presence of two truthful witnesses---Exemption claimed by the preemptor, therefore, related more to a question of fact than the law and whosoever claimed such exemption, it was his bounden duty to prove a material question of fact that no postal facilities were available in or around the village where he resided ---Pre-emptor had not only failed to prove the said fact but it was not mentioned in the plaint either ---Pre-emptor, in circumstances, was not only not entitled to the exemption allowed by S.13(3), proviso of the Act but he even failed to prove on factual side the making of Talb-i-Ishhad in the presence of two truthful witnesses. JUDGMENT SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.---Involving one and the same question pf law and fact between the same parties, the two appeals shall be decided through this single judgment. 2. Abdullah Shah has challenged the judgments dated 5-10-1999 passed by a learned Single Judge of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench in Civil Revisions No.8 of 1999 and 9 of 1999 accepting the revisions of respondents /vendees and non-suiting the petit ioner/pre-emptor. 3. Abdullah…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492