Law: Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)

Section: 15 , 100

  Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)-- ---- S. 15 --- Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.100 --- Superior right of pre emption --- Second appeal --- Oral evidence of witnesses produced by vendee to establish superior right of pre-emption on ground of being collateral of vendor, was not believed by Appellate Court below who reversed the finding of Trial Court on the relevant issue --- Conclusions drawn by --- Appellate Court below based on detailed cogent reasons, not proved to be arbitrary or whimsical, could not be interfered with by High Court in second appeal. Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)... ---- S. 15 ---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.64 --- Statements of witnesses testifying relationship of vendor and vendee, would not be sufficient to establish such relationship where witnesses did not qualify test as laid down by S.50 of the Evidence Act, 1872 or Art.64 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. Ghulam- Muhammad and another v. Allah Yar and others P L D 1965 (W.P.) Lah. 482; Lakshmi Reddi v. Venkata Reddi A I R 1937 PC 201 and Ghulam Qadir v. Nawab Din P L D 1988 SC 701 ref, M. Shah7ad Shatikat for Appellants. Asad Ullah Bajwa for Respondent No.l. Date of hearing: 17th May, 1989. JUDGMENT This appeal under section 100, C.P.C. arose out of a suit for possession through pre-emption riled by Muhammad Yousuf against Muhammad Afzal, the predecessor-in-interest of the present appellant, claiming superior right of pre emption on the basis of ownership in the estate. The suit was resisted by the aforesaid Muhammad Afzal   vendee by taking various pleas including the one that the respondent-plaintiff was not possessed 9f the superior right of pre-emption as against him as he was himself a collateral of Muhammad Naseeb vendor. The learned trial Court, after framing the necessary issues and recording evidence of the parties dismissed the suit returning the finding on issue No.5 that the vendee was a collateral of the vendor and as such has the superior pre-emptive right as against the. plaintiff. The find rip on other issues need not be mentioned as issue No.5 is the only issue, which w-As agitated in the first appeal riled by the respondent pre-emptor as…