Case Details

Citation(s)
1991 SLG 2268 1991 SLD 2268 1991 KLR 31
Lahore High Court
R.S A. No. 418 of 1980, 19th June, 1990
MIAN NAZIR AKTHAR, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Sultan Khan

VS

Shahbaz Khan Etc.

Law:

Section:

Keywords: Sale Deed, Attestation Of Mutation, Jurisdiction, Delivery, Division, Period Of Limitation, Property, Possession Through Pre-Emption, Place, Trial Court, Suit For Pre-Emption, Land, Superior Right, Notice, Change, Revenue Officer, Register, Registered, Period, Mutation, Possession, Evidence, Provisions, Suit For Possession, Pre-Emption, Disposal, Parties, Ownership, Delivery Of Possession, Pecuniary Jurisdiction, Costs, Copy JUDGMENT MIAN NAZIR AKHTAR J.- This Regular Second Appeal arises out of a suit for possession through pre-emption filed by Shahbaz Khan and Muhammad Hanif Khan, respondents, on 14.9.1974 in the Court of the Administrative Civil Judge Mianwali, to pre-empt the sale of the land measuring 97 Kanals 6 marlas situated in the area of mauza Shahbaz Khel Pakka tehsil and District Mianwali. The land was orally sold by Isab Khan for a sum of Rs.80,000/- in favour of the appellant. Thereafter the appellant obtained a declaratory decree regarding his title over the disputed land on 18.7.1973 and a mutation was also sanctioned in favour of the appellant on 15.9.1973. The respondents filed a suit for possession through pre-emption on 14.9.1974 claiming therein that the land was actually sold for a sum of Rs.34,000/- and that they, being sons of the vendor, enjoyed superior right of pre-emption. 2. The trial Court decreed the suit in favour of the respondents, vide the judgment and decree dated 18.12.1977. The appellant initially filed Regular First Appeal in this Court but subsequently, when the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Judges was enhanced to Rs.50,000/-, the appeal was sent to the District Judge, Mianwali, for disposal. It was entrusted to the Additional Distract Judge, Mianwali, who dismissed the same, vide his judgement and decree dated 17.4.1980. 3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the relevant record. The learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the sale was orally effected but subsequently, a declaratory decree was passed in favour of the appellant on 18.7.1973. Hence, counting the limitation from 18.7.1973, the suit filed by the respondents on 14.9.1974 was clearly barred by the. He urged…
🔒
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