| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1955 SLG 2 1955 SLD 2 1955 PLD 76 |
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision Petition No. 258 of 1953, decision dated: 2411 January, 1955, of the decree and judgment of Faizullah Khan Senior Sub-Judge, Peshawar, dated 3rd August, 1953, whereby the decree passed by Muhammad Inam Khan, Sub-Judge, 2nd Class, Charsadda,
MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM, J. C. AND MUHAMMAD SHAFI, J
Allah Bakhsh, for Petitioners. Muhammad Khan, for
Respondent
Civil Revision Petition No. 258 of 1953, decision dated: 2411 January, 1955, of the decree and judgment of Faizullah Khan Senior Sub-Judge, Peshawar, dated 3rd August, 1953, whereby the decree passed by Muhammad Inam Khan, Sub-Judge, 2nd Class, Charsadda,
MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM, J. C. AND MUHAMMAD SHAFI, J
Allah Bakhsh, for Petitioners. Muhammad Khan, for
Respondent
GUL MUHAMMAD KHAN and another --Plaintiffs-s
VS
DILAWAR KHAN and others----Defendants-
Law: N.W.F.P. Pre-emption Act, (XIV of 1950)
Section: 17
(a) N.-W. F. P. Preemption Act (XIV of 1950), S. 17---"Transfer" means only sale and not gift of Property to a person having an equal or superior right of pre-emption to that of the plaintiff. The word " transfer " in section 17 means sale and no other form of conveyance. A vendee, therefore, by gifting away the property in favour of his father, even if the latter had a superior right of preemption and the gift was real and genuine could not nonsuit the plaintiffs. Bhola Nath and another v. Shiv Singh and. others A I R 1939 All. 253 ref. (b) Interpretation of Statutes-Preamble, marginal notes or head-notes-Whether can be referred to, for discovering intention of legislature even when words of enactment are plain. No construction so far as possible should be placed on any law, which is unnatural or which leads to injustice, absurdity, manifest anomalies, or which is calculated to do what is prohibited and enjoined in an indirect or circuitous manner. One has to see also the importance which should be attached to the preamble of a Statute, the side or marginal-notes of the sections contained therein, and the headings pre-fixed to its chapters, if there are any, or to the sections. It cannot be that although the legislature passed into law the preamble, side or the marginal notes of a certain section, or the head-lines attached thereto, as much as it passed the other provisions of law, yet it did not want them to be treated on the same footing as the rest of the law, and in fact wanted them to be looked at only in the case of necessity, for example when the language of the section is obscure and ambiguous. Staff Sergeant Charles Beginald Zepho Finch v. Mrs. Elizabeth Finch A I R 1943 Lah. 260; Taherally Mohammedally Kajiji and others v. Chanabasappa Mallappa Warad A I R 1943 Bom. 226 ; dankiram Company v. Chunilal Shriram A I R 1945 Bom. 40 and The Commissioner of Income-tax Bombay v. Ahmedbhai Umerbhai & Co. Bombay A I R 1950 Sup. Court (India) 134 discussed. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD SHAM, J.---By a sale-deed dated 28th of August 19.51, registered on the 30th of August, 1951, one Maroof Shah sold 3 Kanals 19 Marlas 7 Sarsais of land out of 47 Kanals 15 Marlas,…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492