| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1987 SLG 455 1987 SLD 455 1987 SCMR 1237 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 59-R of 1987 and Civil Appeal No. 17 of 1986, decision dated: 12-04-1987.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, dated 4-6-1984, in Regular Second Appeal No. 577 of 19
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J., NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND, JAVID IQBAL, JJ
Moulvi Sirajul Haq, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Afzal Siddiqi, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Malik Muhammad Jafar, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 2.
Respondent No. 1
Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 59-R of 1987 and Civil Appeal No. 17 of 1986, decision dated: 12-04-1987.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, dated 4-6-1984, in Regular Second Appeal No. 577 of 19
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J., NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND, JAVID IQBAL, JJ
Moulvi Sirajul Haq, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Afzal Siddiqi, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Malik Muhammad Jafar, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 2.
Respondent No. 1
SIRAJ DIN
VS
MUHAMMAD KHAN and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-----Art. 185(3)--Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913), S. 15--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 100--Pre-emption suit--Second appeal--Leave to appeal granted to consider whether a sham and fictitious transfer of property pre-empted out of Court by a vendee in favour of a person having equal right of a pre-emption could defeat a pre-emptor's Suit; and also whether in view of imperative provisions of S. 100, C.P.C., finding of fact recorded by District Judge could be legally interfered with by High Court in a Regular Second Appeal. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- ---O. XXII, R. 4--Pre-emption suit--Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913) , S . 15-- Exchange of property-- Impleading of legal representatives of deceased respondents-- Negligence--Condonation of delay--Supreme Court declined to implead legal representatives of deceased respondent and condone delay at the belated stage of appeal before Supreme Court in circumstances. JUDGMENT JAVID IQBAL J.-- Briefly the facts are that one Ahmad Khan sold land measuring 82 Kanals 14 Marlas to Muhammad Khan respondent on 14th March, 1969. Later on Muhammad Khan respondent-vendee exchanged the said land with Mst. Zaitoon respondent daughter of Ahmad Khan vendor on 21st August, 1969. The present appellant brought a suit to pre-empt the first mentioned land claiming himself to be collateral of Ahmad Khan vendor as against Muhammad Khan respondent-vendee and also disputing the sale price. He likewise assailed the genuineness of the exchange which according to him was a disguise with the intention to defeat his right. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the exchange was genuine and that it was a device permitted under the law to defeat pre-emption. But in the first appeal the District Judge took the opposite view in regard to the exchange holding that it was not a device but a disguise. Thus he accepted the appeal of the present appellant and allowed the suit for pre-emption. The judgment of the District Judge was challenged by Mst. Zaitoon respondent in which she, apart from the present appellant, also impleaded Muhammad Khan vendee as respondent. The RSA was heard by…
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