| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 2237 2016 SLD 2237 2016 YLR 875 |
Peshawar High Court
C.R. No. 15-D of 2014, decided & hearing on 08-09-2015.
MUHAMMAD GHAZANFAR KHAN, JUSTICE
Salah-ud-Din Khan Gandapur for Appellant. Muhammad Wahid Anjum for
Respondent.
C.R. No. 15-D of 2014, decided & hearing on 08-09-2015.
MUHAMMAD GHAZANFAR KHAN, JUSTICE
Salah-ud-Din Khan Gandapur for Appellant. Muhammad Wahid Anjum for
Respondent.
S. REHMAT KHAN AND others
VS
. MALIK ASHIQ
Law:
Section:
(a) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)--- ----S.13---Talbs, performance of---Proof---Trial Court decreed the suit, and appellate court, partially accepted appeal to the extent of payment of taxes paid by defendant, maintained and decree for the rest---Validity---Both courts below concurrently found that plaintiff had successfully proved performance of Talb-e-Muwathibat and Talb-e-Ishhad in accordance with S. 13 of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act, 1987---Courts below, however, failed to observe that notice of Talb-e-Ishhad had been scribed on printed form and blank places thereof had been filled up with particulars of present case, which was against the mandate of S.13 of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act, 1987---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act, 1987 provided special procedure for making of Talb-e-Muwathibat and Talb-e-Ishhad---Talb-e-Ishhad was to be made by sending notice in writing attested by two truthful witnesses declaring intention to exercise right of pre-emption---Said notice was cyclostyled and not in writing; therefore, the same could not be considered as confirmation of Talb-e-Muwathibat---Plaintiff had not been able to prove performance of Talb-e-Ishhad in accord with law---Trial Court had wrongly decreed the suit---Judgments and decrees of both courts below were result of misreading and non-reading of evidence and misinterpretation of law on the subject, and the same were, therefore, set aside---Revision petition was allowed in circumstances. 2014 MLD 114 rel. (b) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)--- ----S. 13---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 75 (b) & O. XXVI, R. 9----Suit for pre-emption---Appointment of local commission---Not permissible prior to proving demands of pre-emption---Defendant contended that Trial Court had not disposed of application for appointment of local commission, which was necessary for determination of improvements made in pre-empted property---Validity---Prior to proving improvements on suit property, that whether the same had been made prior to issuance of notice of Talb-e-Ishhad or afterwards, defendants had to prove factum as to performance of Talbs, which had not been…
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