| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1973 SLG 240 1973 SLD 240 1973 PLD 444 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 180 of 1969, decided on 8th June 1973. DATE of hearing: 11th May 1973. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the former High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 31st March 1965, in. Regular Second Appeal No. 281 of 1957).
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, ACTG. C.J., WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, SALAHUDDIN AHMED, ANWARUL HAQ AND MUHAMMAD GUL, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeal No. 180 of 1969, decided on 8th June 1973. DATE of hearing: 11th May 1973. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the former High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 31st March 1965, in. Regular Second Appeal No. 281 of 1957).
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, ACTG. C.J., WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, SALAHUDDIN AHMED, ANWARUL HAQ AND MUHAMMAD GUL, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
GHULAM MUHAMMAD AND 3 others
VS
KHUSHI MUHAMMAD AND ANOTHER
Law:
Section:
Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913), S. 21-Pre-emption suit Partial pre-emption-Pre-emptor should ordinarily seek pre-emption of whole property, subject-matter of sale-Rule, however, subject to certain exceptions - Such exceptions, nevertheless, do not include vendor's defect in, or want of, title, or desire to avoid further litigation-Partial pre-emption permissible only when of necessity and not because pre-emptor wants same-Pre-emptor giving up claim to part of property, subject-matter of suit, because someone else claimed right therein, held, erred in claiming partial pre-emption and suit rightly dismissed as suffering from defect of partial pre-emption even though pre-emptor offered to pay full price for remaining property. Ordinarily the pre-emptor must take over the whole bargain and he must seek pre-emption of the whole of the subject-matter of the sale and pay the entire price paid by the vendees as consideration. There are, however, certain exceptions which however do not include the vendor's defective or want of title and it is not. open to the pre-emptor to give up the claim as he likes. The partial pre-emption can only be permitted if it is as of necessity, and not because the pre-emptor wants it. The respondents have given up the claim in order to avoid further litigation which, cannot be considered as of necessity. The respondents should not have given up their right to part of property simply because somebody else was claiming right in it. They should have also claimed pre-emption of the portion left out in spite of the fact that the vendors' title was in their opinion defective. Held: The respondents were not right in giving up the claim in respect of the portion abandoned and claiming partial pre-emption. By doing so, the suit has become defective and the District Judge was perfectly justified in holding that the suit suffered from the defect of partial pre-emption. Labh Singh v. Kher Singh A I R 1945 Lab. 11; Muhammad Azeem v. Arbab Sher Ali Khan and another A I R 1933 Pesh. 74; Paltan Singh v. Prag Narain and another A I R 1915 Oudh 167; Sardar Lal Singh v. Diva Singh and another 107 P R 1882; Mahaprashad v. Dukha Haran Nath and another…
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