| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1959 SLG 1 1959 SLD 1 1959 PLD 9 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 53 & 54 of 1957, decision dated: 29th October 1958
M. SHAHABUDDIN, A. R. CORNELIUS, AMIRUDDIN AHMAD AND S. A. RAHMAN, JJ
Muhammad Shafi, Advocate, Supreme Court, instructed by Amjad Hussain, Attorney for Appellant.
Respondent in person
Civil Appeals Nos. 53 & 54 of 1957, decision dated: 29th October 1958
M. SHAHABUDDIN, A. R. CORNELIUS, AMIRUDDIN AHMAD AND S. A. RAHMAN, JJ
Muhammad Shafi, Advocate, Supreme Court, instructed by Amjad Hussain, Attorney for Appellant.
Respondent in person
MUHAMMAD MUZAFFAR KHAN
VS
MUHAMMAD YUSUF KHAN
Law: Income Tax Act, 1922
Section:
(a) Practice--Judge's previous decision on specific law point---To be accepted by Judge as binding on him on subsequent occasion. (b) Co-sharer--- Vendee from co-sharer of specific Khasra No. in Khata becomes a co-sharer in Khata--N. W. F. P., Pre-emption Act (XIV of 1950), S. 12, firstly. The vendee of co-sharer who owns an undivided Khata in common with another, is clothed with the same rights as the vendor has in the property no more and no less. If the vendor was in exclusive possession of a certain portion of the joint land and transfers its possession to his vendee, so long as there is no partition between the co-sharers, the vendee must be regarded as stepping into the shoes of his transferor qua his ownership rights in the joint property, to the extent of the area purchased by him, provided that the area in question does not exceed the share which the transferor owns in the whole property. Alienation of specific plots transferred to the vendee would only entitle the latter to retain possession of them till such time as an actual partition by metes and bounds takes place between the co-sharers. It is difficult to see in these circumstances why the vendee of specific plots acquired from a co-owner, in an undivided Khata, does not become a co-sharer in that Khata. Held, that such a vendee was a co-sharer within the meaning of S. 12, firstly of the N. W. F. P. Pre-emption Act (XIV of 1950). Matu and others v. Hirde 44 .Punjab Record 1894 (Civil); Jawala Shanker Sahai v. Bohra Siri Ram A I R 1930 All. 729 ; Mir Alam Khan v. Abdul Hamid Khan A I R 1944 Pesh. 40 ; Bahle Singh v. Harnam Singh 37 P L R 276 and Rajindra Singh v. Umrao Singh A I R 1925 Lah. 223 distinguished. Civil Appeal No. 101 of 1943 (unpublished) ref. JUDGMENT S. A. RAHMAN, J.-These two appeals come to us on a certificate granted, under clause (c) of section 109 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by a learned Judge of the West Pakistan High Court, Peshawar Bench, which is, in law, the successor Court to that of the Judicial Commissioner, Peshawar. The appeals are directed against the consolidated judgment of the Judicial Commissioner, Peshawar, dated the 25th January 1955, by which two revision…
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