| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 1569 2021 SLD 1569 2021 YLR 1445 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 94 of 2012, decided on 4th October, 2016.
MUHAMMAD AMEER BHATTI, JUSTICE
Raja Maqbool Hussain for Petitioner. Raja Muhammad Tariq Khan, for
Respondents.
Civil Revision No. 94 of 2012, decided on 4th October, 2016.
MUHAMMAD AMEER BHATTI, JUSTICE
Raja Maqbool Hussain for Petitioner. Raja Muhammad Tariq Khan, for
Respondents.
AMIR KHAN
VS
MUHAMMAD TAJ
Law: Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991
Section: 13
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 26-B,31,96
(a) Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991)--- ----S.13---Suit for pre-emption---Scope assailed the dismissal of his suit for possession through pre-emption with the assertion that he had a superior right---Suit was concurrently dismissed---Validity had failed to establish that he was owner of an inch of land in the same khasra number wherefrom the respondent had purchased the land---Courts below had rightly reached at the conclusion that the petitioner had no preferential right---Revision petition was dismissed. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----Ss. 26-B 31---Filing of list of witnesses---Summons to witness---Scopes application for summoning production of Postman and Record Keeper along with record was dismissed by the Trial Court without any legal justification despite the fact that he had specifically incorporated the names of Postman and Record Keeper along with record in the list of witnesses to be summoned through Court and on many occasions the Court had ordered about their summoning but for unknown reasons the orders were not complied with---Counsel of plaintiff after producing the other witnesses had inadvertently made the statement for closing of evidence---Despite mistake of the counsel, the Court had to perform its duty when specifically, in the list of witnesses, the names of witnesses were incorporated, who were to be summoned through the Court. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 96---Appeal from original decree---Interlocutory order--- Scope--- Not necessary to challenge every interim order in grounds of appeal but entire case including interim orders is reopened at the time of hearing appeal. Mst. Khurshid Begum and others v. Ahmad Bakhsh and others PLD 1985 SC 405 and Muhammad Bashir v. Muhammad Hussain and 16 others 2009 SCMR 1256 rel. (d) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 96---Appeal from original decree---Interlocutory order---Scope---Appellate Court has been given full authority to examine each and every interim order as well as all proceedings conducted by the Trial Court as appeal is continuation of the suit. ORDER MUHAMMAD AMEER BHATTI, J.--- This revision petition calls-in-question the concurrent findings of…
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