Case Details

Citation(s)
1998 SLG 1439 1998 SLD 1439 1998 CLC 1433
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 184 of 1984, heard on 11-05-1998
SYED NAJAM-UL-HASSAN KAZMI, J
Mahmood Ahmad Chaudhry for Petitioner. Malik Muhammad Kabir, Asstt. A.G. for
Respondent

TALIB HUSSAIN

VS

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Law:

Section:

Punjab Local Councils (Tax on Transfer of Immovable Property) Rules, 1981--­----Rr.3 & 5---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XX, R.14 & S.115---Suit for recovery of specified amount which was realised by respondent as District Council fee on mutation attested in favour of plaintiff in terms of decree for possession through pre-emption ---Suit - as also appeal filed by plaintiff were dismissed by Courts below---Validity---Plaintiff's suit for pre-emption having been decreed, no sale or transfer would be deemed to have taken place ---Pre­ emptor (plaintiff) had simply stepped into shoes of vendor on basis of right of substitution---No fresh transfer had taken place---Sale was pre-empted on the ground that plaintiff had superior right---Such right having been acknowledged by Court, plaintiff was ordered to be substituted for defendant vendee--Plaintiff on payment of requisite amount, by force of O.XX, R.14, C.P.C. would automatically become owner of property without any intervening sale-deed or deed of conveyance---District Council fee was, however, admittedly been charged at the time of original sale, therefore, respondents could not be allowed to make double levy on the transaction---No tax was, thus, payable on attestation of mutation based on decree for pre-emption, for the same did not involve element of transfer and that amount in question, could not be recovered from plaintiff as he was not transferor within meaning of R.5, Punjab Local Councils (Tax on Transfer of Immovable Property) Rules, 1981---Specified amount having been illegally charged and recovered from plaintiff, he would be entitled to the refund thereof---Findings recorded by two Courts below in dismissing plaintiff's claim being contradictory to law and suffering from perversity of reasoning, could not be sustained---Amount recovered from plaintiff as District Council fee was ordered to be refunded to him. JUDGMENT This revision brings under challenge, judgments of the Courts below, by which, the suit of the petitioner for recovery of Rs.6,250 was dismissed. 2. Land measuring 3 Kanals was sold by Muzaffar Ahmad son of Sh. Mahamood in favour of Dr. Muhammad Younas, son of Hafiz…
🔒
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