Law: Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991

Section: 6(1)(C)

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 11

Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991)--- ----S. 6(1)(c)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VII, R. 11---Suit for pre-emption---Shafi Jar---Proof---Plaint of suit not mentioning whether pre-emptor was owner of immovable property adjacent to the property sold---Effect---Rejection of plaint---Since the very foundation of the pre-emptors claim was his ownership of the adjacent immovable property on the basis whereof he asserted superior pre-emptive rights of a Shafi Jar, it was necessary for him to assert his ownership, which was not only a material fact but an essential one---However the plaints did not state that the pre-emptor owned the immovable property, on the basis whereof he claimed rights of Shafi Jar to the two plots, and the same was the position with regard to his replies to the application under O. VII, R. 11, C.P.C.---No document was available on record which disclosed the pre-emptors ownership to the immovable property on the basis of which he claimed the right of a Shafi Jar---As the plaints did not state that the pre-emptor was the owner of the adjacent property, therefore, he should not be permitted to lead evidence to assert and then to establish his ownership of the adjacent immovable property---Plaints in both suits were rejected under O. VII, R. 11, C.P.C.---Petitions for leave to appeal were converted into appeals and allowed. Government of West Pakistan v. Haji Muhammad PLD 1976 SC 469 473 ref. ORDER Qazi Faez Isa, J. Respondent No. 1 filed two pre-emption suits claiming a superior right to the two plots purchased by the petitioner alleging that he was a Shafi Jar under the Punjab Pre-Emption Act, 1991 (the two plots and the Act) as he resided in the immovable property which lay adjacent to the two plots. In our order dated 30 March 2021 we had noted the contention raised by the learned Malik Muhammad Rafiq Rajwana with regard to the non-applicability of the Act to plots situated within the area of the Officers Colony of the Multan Development Authority (MDA).However, the learned counsel has raised another and a more fundamental point, which is that in the suits filed by the respondent No. 1 he did not assert that he was the owner of the…

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