Law:

Section:

(a) Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)- Read with Land Reforms Regulation, 1972, para. 25(3) (d)-Pre-emption--Doctrine of sinker applicable to those cases also in which right of pre-emption claimed on basis of cl. (d) of sub-para. (3) of para. 25 of Land Reforms Regulation-Concept underlying pre-emption law to keep strangers out of propertyNot negatived by Regulation. Muhammad Yusuf etc. v. Board of Revenue etc. 1979 C L C 284 ref. Rana Muhammad Latrf Khan and another v. Kanwar Saeed Ahmed Khan P L D 1978 Lah. 299 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- S. 100-Second appeal-Issue relating to appellants' contention that suit was benami involving question of fact on which finding of trial Court not .challenged by appellants before Court of first appeal as well as in appeal before High Court-Appellants, held, cannot assail decision of trial Court in High Court on this plea. JUDGMENT The respondent, Mst. Khurshid Bibi, filed a suit against the appellants, Abdul Hamid and 2 others, for possession of certain. land through preemption. She claimed right of pre-emption on the ground that she was daughter of Bahadur who had sold the disputed land to the appellants but the appellants were not in any way related to him. In defence, it was alleged by the appellants that they were occupying the disputed land as tenants at the time of its sale and had, therefore, the first right of pre-emption. It was also urged by them that the suit was benami as it. had been filed by the respondent for the benefit of her husband. 2. The learned Civil Judge who heard the suit found that out of the three appellants only Abdul Hameed cultivated the land in question as a tenant at the time of its, sale in their favour but the other appellants were strangers. Therefore, by applying the doctrine of sinker, he treated all the appellants as strangers vis-a-vis respondent, who was found to be the daughter of the vendor, and recorded a finding to the- effect that she had a superior right of pre-emption. It was also held by hint that the suit was not for the sake of her husband. Resultantly, the suit was decreed by the trial Court. 3. The judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court were…

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