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

Section: 15 , 115

Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)-- ---S. 15---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 115---Plaintiffs pre-emption suit dismissed as barred by limitation on preliminary issue---Trial Court's finding having been upheld in appeal plaintiffs plea in revision was that his suit having been filed on 15-4-1972, within one year of the date of attestation of mutation i.e. 17-4-1971, was well within time and there was no justification to dismiss it as barred by time as also because of his ownership in the estate coupled with contiguity his suit was not hit by the decision of Supreme Court in Said Kamal Shah's Case reported as PLD 1986 SC 360---Plaintiff, in his plaint, had claimed his superior right of pre-emption on the basis of being collateral of vendor and ,not as a co-owner in estate---Plaint did not contain the plea that plaintiff was owner in estate or his ownership in estate was coupled with contiguity--Plaintiff had also not filed any application for the amendment of plaint till the time of arguments---Plaintiff thus could not contend that he was either the owner in estate or his ownership in estate was coupled with contiguity---No decree for possession by pre-emption having been passed in plaintiffs favour before 1-8-1986, no decree could now be passed in his favour and as such remand of case to Trial Court for further proceedings in suit would be merely a wastage of time. Ahmad and others v. Abdul Aziz and others Civil Review Petition No.80-R of 1988 PLD 1989 SC 771 and Said Kamal's case PLD 1986 SC 360 ref. Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- ---S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction, excersie of---Essentials---High Court in its discretion could refuse to entertain or accept revision application in suitable case even though requirements of S. 115, CPC are satisfied---Circumstances in case justifying non-exercise of revisional jurisdiction stated. The revisional jurisdiction under section 115 CPC is discretionary in nature and ordinarily be exercised only as last resort for-an aggrieved party. High Court may in its discretion refuse to entertain or accept revision application in suitable cases, although the subordinate Courts appear to have exercised a…