Law:

Section:

Punjab Preemption Act (I of 1913)- S. 22 read with Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) O. XX. r. 14-- ­Preemption suit Extension of time to make requisite deposit ­Decree of trial Court standing that in event of default in payment suit stall stand dismissed decree, held, became operative of its own force on happening of default and time fixed by decree cold not be extended thereafter. [Preemption]. Shah Wali v. Ghulam Din P L. D 1966 S C. 983. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C J. The -Petitioner herein filed a suit for pre-emption of a transaction of sale entered into on the, 5th of December, 1963. whereby the -Respondents purchased the property in dispute ostensibly for Rs.1,20,982.50. The preemptor alleged in his plaint that the real Price was only Rs. 80,000. During the trial, tire plaintiff -Petitioner agreed to be bound by the oath of the -Respondent No. I on the Holy Qur'an as to the value of the property. The said -Respondent took the oath that the price paid for the property was Rs. 1,20,982.50. The other issues were decided in favour of the -Petitioner and Preemption was decreed on the 9th of May, 1966, subject to the payment of Rs. 1,20,982,50 less the sum already deposited, on or before the 9th of June, 1966. On the 7th of June, 1966, the -Petitioner Applied for, permission to deposit Rs. 95,786 which he was allowed to do, but, unfortunately, his calculation turned out to be wrong and the deposit short by Rs. 1, 000. In the circumstances, the suit for preemption stood dismissed in terms of the decree itself on the 9th of June, 1966. The -Petitioner, however, filed an appeal in the High Court with a view to getting an extension of time for making the deposit. The defendant also filed an appeal challenging the decree of the trial Court. The High Court Held that the -Petitioner was…

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