| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1980 SLD 3144 = 1980 CLC 989 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No. 196 of 1979, decided on 4th December: 3979.
Presented By: Muhammad Amin Butt, J
Sher Muhammad v. Raiada P L D 1969 Lah. 471 and Jangi v. Jhanda P L D 1971 B J 34 ref. Asghar Ali for Appellant. Zafar Pasha for
Respondent.
Regular Second Appeal No. 196 of 1979, decided on 4th December: 3979.
Presented By: Muhammad Amin Butt, J
Sher Muhammad v. Raiada P L D 1969 Lah. 471 and Jangi v. Jhanda P L D 1971 B J 34 ref. Asghar Ali for Appellant. Zafar Pasha for
Respondent.
Syed MURTAZA SHAH-Petitioner
VERSUS
ZIARATA ALI-Respondent
Law: Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913
Section: 30(f)
Punjab Pre-emption Act (1 of 1913) S. 30(f)-Suit to enforce right of pre-emption -Limitation period starts from date of attestation of mutation or date of delivery of possession, whichever earlier-Possession having been delivered earlier, limitation period, held, started from date of possession and not from date of attestation of mutation.-[Limitation]. Clause (I) of section 30 of Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 clearly lays down two alternate conditions from which the limitation of one year may be reckoned. First being the date of attestation of the sale by the Revenue Officer in the register of mutation and the second the date on which the vendee takes under the sale physical possession of any part of such land. Legislature in its wisdom has chosen to lay down two alternative conditions and has further declared in unequivocal terms that the limitation shall be reckoned from the earlier of the dates. If attesta tion of mutation were to be the only date from which limitation has to be reckoned the alternate clause (which permits of the limitation to be com puted from the date of possession) together with the expression "which ever date shall be the earlier" shall also become redundant and mere surplusages because in every case it shall have to be reckoned from the date of attestation of the mutation under the first clause. It is well-settled principle of interpretation that the Courts would avoid that interpreta tion which would render any words in any enactment as surplusage. Limitation has to be reckoned from the date on which the appellant took possession of the land. Dates of hearing : 12th and 13th November, 1979. JUDGMENT The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 12th February, 1979 passed by the learned…