| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 2195 2017 SLD 2195 2017 YLR 916 |
Peshawar High Court
C.R. No. 681-P of 2014, decision & hearing Date : 19-09-2016.
MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM KHAN, JUSTICE
Amjad Ali for Petitioner. Ahmad Ali for
Respondents.
C.R. No. 681-P of 2014, decision & hearing Date : 19-09-2016.
MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM KHAN, JUSTICE
Amjad Ali for Petitioner. Ahmad Ali for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD SHOAIB
VS
ZAMIN KHAN AND 4 OTHERS
Law:
Section:
(a) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)--- ----S. 13---Talbs, performance of---Requirements---Suit was dismissed by the Courts below on the ground that pre-emptor had failed to perform talbs in accordance with law---Validity---Pre-emptor was already in the know of sale of suit property as alleged by the informer---Plaintiff was bound to have met the jumping demand---Pre-emptor had failed to prove Talb-i-Muwathibat as required under the pre-emption law---Notice of Talb-i-Ishhad was drafted on 30-03-2010 while Talb-i-Muwathibat was required to be performed on the date when sale deed was registered i.e. 22-11-2009---Notice of Talb-i-Ishhad was required to be served by 05-01-2010---Demand of Talb-i-Ishhad was yon of time---Findings recorded by the Courts below were based on facts---Revision was dismissed in circumstances. Subhan-ud-Din and others v. Pir Ghulam PLD 2015 SC 69; Muhammad Siddique v. Muhammad Sharif 2005 SCMR 1231; Muhammad Hussain v. Manzoor Hussain 2004 SCMR 737; Ali Muhammad v. Ghulam Muhammad 2003 CLC 282; Zafar Ali v. Zain-ul-Abideen 1992 SCMR 1886; Mian Pir Muhammad v. Faqir Muhammad PLD 2007 SC 302; Haji Muhammad Samin v. Khuda Bakhsh PLD 2003 SC 315; Mst. Balori v. Jillani 2011 MLD 974; 2002 MLD 118; Muhammad Ramzan v. Lal Khan 1995 SCMR 1510 and PLD 2010 Pesh. 65 rel. (b) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)--- ----S. 13---'Talb-i-Muwathibat'---Meaning. This demand (Talb-i-Muwathibat) means immediate demand by a pre-emptor in the setting or meeting (Majlis) in which he has come to know of the sale, declaring his intention to exercise the right of pre-emption. Any word indicative of intention to exercise the rights of pre-emption are sufficient. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---High Court could exercise revisional jurisdiction if findings recorded by the Courts below were perverse, fanciful, erroneous, based on mis-reading and non-reading of evidence. Muhammad Idrees and others v. Muhammad Pervez and others 2010 SCMR 5 and Muhammad Zahoor through L.Rs. v. Muhammad Abid Qayyum and another 2013 MLD 1473 rel. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM KHAN,…
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