Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1563 2020 SLD 1563 2020 SCMR 1517
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 1198 to 1201 of 2014, hearing & decision Dated: 09-07-2020 (On appeal from the judgment Dated 02.05.2014 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench in C.Rs. Nos. 12, 13 and 18 of 2012)
MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE
Muhammad Munir Paracha, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant (in all cases). Khalid Rehman Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents (in all cases).

IFTIKHAR AHMED

VS

MST. SAIMA ZIA AND OTHERS

Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act, (X of 1987)

Section: 6(a),6(c)

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)--- ----Ss. 6(a) & 6(c)---Right of pre-emption---Shafi-sharik---Shafi-jar---Suit property, sold through different sale deeds, comprised of a 'haveli' owned by predecessor of the vendors---After demise of their predecessor the property devolved upon his legal heirs (vendors)---All the legal heirs, due to their family settlement, retained their separate possessions of their respective shares being a pre-emptor had also purchased specific share from the suit 'haveli'---Contention on behalf of appellant that since he had purchased the shares of some of the legal heirs from the joint property, he had become- co-owner in the 'haveli' and as such had superior right of pre-emption as shafi-sharik---Held, that sales made in favour of the appellant as well as the impugned sales (under pre-emption) would show sale of specific areas with their separate specific boundaries---Contention on behalf of appellant, in the given circumstances, had no force at all could not be termed as a co-owner of the property as all the legal heirs were in possession of their respective shares due to family settlement which amounted to private partition and the 'haveli' as such was no more a joint property, in the given situation, had become owner to the extent of his share he had purchased with the specific boundaries and could not be termed as co- owner in the entire property---Perusal of all sale deeds, including the impugned sales (under pre-emption) reflected that each impugned sale deed had different boundaries from the boundaries given in the sale deeds of the appellant---Such factum clearly showed that the property owned by the appellant was not adjacent/contiguous with any of the suit property, so, the appellant could not be termed as a pre -emptor having superior right of pre-emption as shafi-jar having failed to establish his superior right of pre-emption was rightly non-suited by the fora below---Appeals were dismissed. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE:---.--- The appellant had filed four different pre-emption suits against four independent sale transactions in favour of respective vendee-defendants…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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