Case Details

Citation(s)
1990 SLD 557 = 1990 MLD 1019
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No. 209 of 1983, decided on 14th February, 1990
Presented By: Before Muhammad Bashir Khan Jehangir, J
Muhammad Aman Khan for Petitioner. Saifur Rehman Kiyani for
Respondent No. 1.

ABDUL AKBAR--Petitioner

VERSUS

FAZAL MAHMOOD and 2 others--Respondents

Law: North West Frontier Province Preemption Act, (X of 1987)

Section: 31

  North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)-- ---S. 31---Suit to enforce right of pre-emption ---Period of limitation---Consent decree---Effect on limitation---Consent decree, whereby land in question was transferred to vendee, amounted to an agreement to sell between the parties, notwithstanding the fact that same had been recorded and bore the seal of the Court---Cause of action would thus accrue to pre-emptors, when mutation had been attested on the strength of consent decree. Ghulam Akbar Khan v. Haji Sher Jan and others 1989 C L C 1789; Habib v. Haji Muhammad P L D 1970 Kar. 495 and Turab Shah v. Warad Shah PLD 1987 Pesh. 132 rel. Barkhurdar v. Muhammad Razzaq P L D 1989 S C 749 ref. North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)--- ----S.31---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of---Concurrent finding of fact of two Courts below that vendee had failed to bring on record even an iota of evidence that he had been put into physical possession of suit land on or prior to consent decree, was found to be unexceptionable ---Vendee failed to point  out  any  misreading  or  non-reading  of  evidence  by  two  Courts  below ---Pre-emptor's suit to pre-empt suit land within statutory period from attestation of mutation was well within time---Findings of Courts below in favour of pre-emptors, on point of limitation were thus affirmed by High Court in revisional jurisdiction. North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)--- ----S.28---Suit for pre-emption ---Determination of market value---Mode of-- While determining market value, five years' average could not be a correct yardstick due to inflatory trend in real estate prices---Five years' average price was thus not a' correct criteria to be followed for the determination of market value of the suit land---Although there was no average of one yearly price on record, nonetheless, price of land in question claimed by vendee, did not seem to be fictitious and exorbitant---Judgments and decrees of Courts below were modified to the extent of price of land as specified by…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register