| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1999 SLG 458 1999 SLD 458 1999 SCMR 2239 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.440-L of 1997, decision dated: 18th January 1999. (On appeal against the judgment and order, dated 1-4-1997, of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Civil Revision No.827 of 1987)
RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN AND SH. RIAZ AHMED, JJ
Ch. Muhammad Aslam Sandhu, Advocate Supreme Court. and Muhammad Islam, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Mahmoodul Islam, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 3
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.440-L of 1997, decision dated: 18th January 1999. (On appeal against the judgment and order, dated 1-4-1997, of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Civil Revision No.827 of 1987)
RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN AND SH. RIAZ AHMED, JJ
Ch. Muhammad Aslam Sandhu, Advocate Supreme Court. and Muhammad Islam, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Mahmoodul Islam, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 3
MAHMOOD AHMED and 16 others
VS
AZIZ and 2 others
Law:
Section:
Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)--Ss. 15 & 21---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Suit for preemption ---Defence based on suit being for partial pre-emption---Land in dispute was sold in favour of five vendees/petitioners through an oral sale vide mutation and share of all five vendees was different from each other which had been specifically mentioned in mutations ---Respondents/pre-emptors filed suit for possession through pre-emption on the ground that they were collaterals of vendor and that their land was contiguous and irrigated through a common watercourse---Suit was decreed by Trial Court---Appeal filed by vendees/petitioners against and decree of Trial Court was dismissed by First Appellate Court on sole ground that a co-vendee had not joined as appellant to assail and decree of Trial Court and that transaction of land in dispute being indivisible decree for partial pre-emption could not be passed---Revision petition filed against said was also dismissed by High Court---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider questions that since share of each of vendees had been specified in mutation. could it be said that it was case of partial pre-emption: whether non-joinder of real brother of respondents/pre-emptors in appeal was fatal. ORDER SH. RIAZ AHMED, J.---The facts to brief giving rise to the institution of this petition for leave to appeal are that agricultural land measuring 42 Kanals, 18 Marlas situated in village Khaneki More, Tehsil Chunian, District Kasur was sold by Mst. Rehmat Bibi widow and other legal heirs of Ahmed Dir to favour of the petitioners Nos. l and 2 and predecessor-in-interest of petitioners Nos.8 to 17 and respondent No.3 through an oral sale vide Mutation No. 1028, dated 13-12-1973. The share of all the five vendees was different from each other and had been specifically mentioned in the mutation. 2. Respondents Nos.1 and 2 filed a suit for possession through preemption on the…
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