| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1980 SLD 3088 = 1980 CLC 977 |
Lahore High Court
First Appeal from Original Order No, 34 of 1977, heard on 14th November, 1979
Presented By: Muhammad 1lyas, J
Muhammad Aslam v. Muhammad Akram and others 1968 Law N6tes Lah. 176 rel. Ghulam Muhammad Bhatti for Appellant. Sh. Khurshid 1qbal for
Respondent.
First Appeal from Original Order No, 34 of 1977, heard on 14th November, 1979
Presented By: Muhammad 1lyas, J
Muhammad Aslam v. Muhammad Akram and others 1968 Law N6tes Lah. 176 rel. Ghulam Muhammad Bhatti for Appellant. Sh. Khurshid 1qbal for
Respondent.
ABDUR RASHID SHAH--Appellant
VERSUS
KHURSHID AHMAD AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Law: Land Reforms Regulation, 1972
Section: 25, 5, 6
(a) Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 [M. L. R. 115] Pares. 25, sub-paras. (5) & (6) as added bar Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance (XX of 1976), S. 6-Jurisdiction of civil Courts qua pending appeals-No express provision ousting jurisdiction of civil Courts in regard to appeals pending before them at time of amendment--Pending appeals, held, to be heard and decided by appellate Courts on civil side and not by Com missioners,-[Jurisdiction--Appeal (civil)], F. A. Khan v. The Government of Pakistan P L D 1964 S C 520 ref. (b) Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 (M. L. R. 115) Pares. 25 (3) (d)-Kharif 1972 commencing from June 1972, sale in dispute, made in August, 1972 deemed to have taken place after Kharif 1972-Application of cl. (d) of sub-pares. (3) of para. 25, held, attracted. Date of hearing : 14th November, 1979, JUDGMENT The facts giving rise to this appeal are that the respondent, Khurshid Ahmed, filed a suit against the appellant, Abdul Rashid, for possession of a piece of land, through pre-emption, alleging that he was a tenant of the disputed land and, therefore, had the first right of pre-emption by virtue of clause (d) of sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 25 of the Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 (formerly known as Martial Law Regulation No. 115). The suit was resisted by the appellant inter alia on the ground that the respondent had no cause of action inasmuch as the provisions of the said Regulation were not applicable to the sale in question. This sale took place on 8th August, 1972 and the right of pre-emption asserted by the respondent was conferred on the tenants with effect from Kharif 1972. The plea raised by the appellant was that the sale in dispute was effected before Kharif 1972 and, therefore, it could not be…