Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O,VIII, R. 2

Law: North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act, (XIV of 1950)

Section: 12

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 185(3)

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--O,VIII, R. 2---Maxim "Secundum allegata et probate" ---Party to litigation can only succeed according to what was alleged and proved---Where petitioner's plea that sale in his favour having been made only in column of cultivation which did not confer on him status of co-owner was for the first time raised before High Court without having been taken either in written statement or in evidence of Patwart in memorandum of appeal, such plea being violative of the rule of "secundum allegata et probate", petitioner could not be allowed to succeed on such plea---Party can only succeed according to what was alleged and proved.--[Maxim].(b) North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act (XIV of 1950)-------S. 12---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Co-sharer---Suit for pre-emption ---Sale of land in column of cultivation of joint Khata---Status of vendee in such joint Khata---Vendee of co-sharer who owned undivided Khata in common with another was clothed with the same rights that vendor had in such property---Where vendor was in exclusive possession of portion of joint land and had transferred his possession to his vendee, so long as there was no partition between co-sharers, vendee must be regarded as stepping into the shoes of his transferor qua his ownership rights in joint property, to the extent of area purchased by him, provided that area in question did not exceed the share which transferor owned in whole property---Whenever co--sharer in joint Khata sells particular Khasra number or portion thereof, sale is entered only i:; column of cultivation containing names of vendor and vendee and ownership column remains unchanged ---Vendee of specific plot acquired from co-owner, in undivided Khatz, thus, becomes co-owner in that Khata---Respondent being vendee of specific Khasra number to joint property could validly lay claim to tie a co-sharer and enforce his right of pre-emption on that score---Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances. Muhammad Muzaffar Khan v. Muhammad Yusuf Khan PLD 1959 SC (Pak.) 9 rel.Muhammad Zahoor Qureshi Azad, Advocate Supreme Court/Advocate-�on-Record for Petitioner.Nemo for…