Law:

Section:

(a) Islamic law--- ----Pre-emption---Talbs, performance of---Conditions---Evidence of pre-emptor and his witnesses was not confidence inspiring---Pre-emptor and his witnesses had made improvements in their depositions with regard to facts of the case---Major discrepancies in the evidence of pre-emptor existed on record---Evidence of pre-emptor was unbelievable and untrustworthy---No evidence was produced by the pre-emptor to establish his ownership of other land alleged to be abutting with the suit land---Party could not claim to be Shafi-i-Jar or Shafi-i-Khalit to enforce right of pre-emption merely on the basis of unsupported assertions with regard to ownership of some land presumed to be lying next to a sold out piece of land---Certain conditions should stand fulfilled before a person could claim his entitlement to the right of pre-emption---Person should either be a co-sharer in the property (Shafi-Sharik), or a participator in the immunities and appendages such as to use the same way or right to discharge water (Shafi-i-Khalit) and/or he must be the owner of the adjoining immovable property (Shafi-i-Jar) to claim such right---Evidence beyond pleadings could not be looked into---Plaintiff was bound to prove not only on the date of sale but also at the time of instituting proceedings to claim right of pre-emption and up to the time the decree was passed by Trial Court he had the superior right of pre-emption being the owner of adjoining land---Plaintiff had failed to maintain his right of pre-emption to the suit land up to the time the decree in his case was passed---No piece of material brought on record had been excluded out of the consideration by the courts below---Appellate Court had given findings on all the points the parties were at odds with each other by discussing issues framed by the Trial Court---No prejudice had been occasioned to the pre-emptor with regard to non-framing of points for determination by the Appellate Court---Appellate Court had given its in accordance with the provisions of O. XLI, R. 31, C.P.C. as every disputed point had been dealt and findings were supported by reasoning---Technicalities should not be allowed to impede the…