Case Details

Citation(s)
1987 SLG 253 1987 SLD 253 1987 SCMR 194
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 706 of 1986, decision dated: 7-12-1986.(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 7-6-1986 in R.S.A. No. 256 of 1985)
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN AND SAAD SAOOD, JAN, JJ
Sh. Hamid Mukhtar, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.Nemo for
Respondent.

SHAN MUHAMMAD and 3 others

VS

IMTIAZ AHMAD

Law:

Section:

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-----Art. 185(3)--Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913), Ss. 15 & 16-­Pre-emption suit--Leave to appeal granted to consider contention of petitioner that High Court and Additional District Judge had ignored material evidence in holding that all petitioners were not tenants in land in dispute on the day of impugned sale. JUDGMENT SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--This petition for special leave to appeal arises out of a pre-emption suit which was filed by the respondent in respect of a sale of agricultural land made by his father in favour of the petitioners. The petitioner's defence to the suit was that on the day of the sale they were tenants in the land in dispute and as such the respondent did not possess a superior right with reference to them. The trial Court accepted the plea of the petitioners and dismissed the suit. The respondent preferred an appeal before the learned Additional District Judge. After re-appraising the evidence the learned Additional District Judge came to the conclusion that the petitioners were not tenants in the land at the time of the sale and since the respondent was admittedly the son of the vendor he had a preferential right to acquire the land. Accordingly, he decreed the suit of the respondent. The petitioners challenged the decision of the learned Additional District Judge in second appeal in the High Court. The High Court found that one of the petitioners, namely, Shan Muhammad, was not recorded as tenant in the revenue record; as the other petitioners had joined him in the sale which was indivisible they, too, could not defend the suit on the plea of being tenants. Accordingly, it dismissed the appeal. 2. In support of this petition for special leave to appeal…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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