Law:

Section:

Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 (I of 1913)-- ----S. 5--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 185(3)--Superior right of pre-emption--Co-sharer--Concurrent findings--Plea was not taken in written statement--Improvement of status--Land was purchased for residential purpose--Validity--Contention of--Held: Evidence was ignored--Respondents had proved their superior right of pre-emption against the appellants--Appellants on the relevant date of purchase of suit land had no land in the estate--Whereas the respondent was the owner in the estate before the said sale--Appellants could not claim themselves to be the owner of the estate for the reason that it was purchased for residential purpose and secondly they paid no land revenue, hence could not be treated to be owner of the state--No misreading/non-reading of material evidence--No interference in concurrent findings of fact--Appeal dismissed. [Pp. 714 & 715] A, B & C PLD 1989 SC 373; 1994 SCMR 1168, followed. Judgment Abdul Hameed Dogar J.--This appeal with leave of the Court is directed against the judgment dated 12.11.1999 passed by learned Judge in Chamber of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Civil Revision No. 1087 of 1987 filed by appellants was dismissed. 2. Briefly, stated, facts giving rise to the filing of instant appeal are that appellants purchased the land in dispute for a sum of Rs. 13,000/- vide Mutation No. 260. On 27.7.1982 the respondent filed suit for pre-emption on the basis of being co- sharer before the trial Court. The appellants contested the suit by filing written statement wherein they denied the superior right of pre-emption of the respondent as claimed in the plaint. The trial Court framed as many as six issues including relief and after recording the evidence decided the suit on 11.5.1986 while holding that "the suit of the plaintiff/respondent is decreed in his favour against defendants/appellant for Rs. 13,000/-. Plaintiff/respondent was directed to deposit the decretal amount minus 1/5th pre-emption money already deposited upto 11.6.1986, failing which his suit shall stand dismissed with costs." Feeling aggrieved, appellants preferred appeal before the Additional District…

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