| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1990 SLG 870 1990 SLD 870 1990 SCMR 968 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 782 of 1989, decision dated: 29-10-19$9.
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J., SHAFIURRAHMAN, SAAD SAOOD, JAN, ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH AND NAIMUDDIN, JJ
Muhammad Hanif Niazi, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Kadri, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents.
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 782 of 1989, decision dated: 29-10-19$9.
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J., SHAFIURRAHMAN, SAAD SAOOD, JAN, ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH AND NAIMUDDIN, JJ
Muhammad Hanif Niazi, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Kadri, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ and others
VS
MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others
Law:
Section:
Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)-------S. 15---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Plaintiffs' pre-emption suit was dismissed by Trial Court on the ground that deficiency in court-fee was made out after the period prescribed by Court and outside the period of limitation prescribed for filing the suit---Findings of Trial Court were reversed in First Appeal and High Court maintained the findings of First Appellate Court, in second appeal---Leave to appeal---Contentions raised were, that the suit having been filed before an incompetent Court, it was only after the period of limitation that the competent Court came to handle it, and it was by then barred by time; that the statement of net profits had already been obtained by plaintiffs, and they could work out the deficiency in court-fee themselves and supply it before the limitation period expired, thus it was not necessary for the Court to have determined specific amount itself and call upon the plaintiffs to make up the deficiency---First contention having not been urged before any Court or Authority at any earlier stage, same could not be allowed to be raised at the petition for leave to appeal stage because it had a factual content which remained unexplored and undetermined so far---And on the other contention an authoritative pronouncement of Supreme Court in Siddique Khan's case reported as PLD 1984 SC 289, left no scope for defendants on the question of law raised--Leave to appeal was refused. Muhammad Ali v. Allah Ditta and 4 others PLD 1979 Lah. 763 ref. Siddique Khan and 2 others v. Abdul Shakur Khan and another PLD 1984 SC 289 rel. JUDGMENT SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.---The Petitioners, who are the defendant vendees, seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 15-5-1989 whereby a Regular Second Appeal filed by them, was dismissed. 2. The sale which was the subject-matter of pre-emption suit had taken place through Mutation No. 98 dated 20-4-1974. The suit was instituted on 15-4-1975 in the Court of Civil Judge 3rd Class,. Kabirwala who ordered for its fixation for 15-5-1975 on which date the pre-emptors were called upon to file the statement of net assets and to make up…
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