Case Details

Citation(s)
1991 SLG 959 1991 SLD 959 1991 SCMR 446
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos. 71-R and 72-R of 1989, decision dated: 28th February 1990(On appeal from the judgment of the Peshawar High Court, Circuit Bench at Abbottabad dated 9-10-1988 in Civil Revisions Nos. 83 and 84 of 1988)
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ AND RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, 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

LAL KHAN

Mst. ZARINA JAN and others

Law:

Section:

North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act (XIV of 1950)--S.31---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Pre-emption suit---Period of limitation---Starting point---All the three Courts had given concurrent finding to the effect that possession of land in question, did not pass to vendee, at the time of " " and that limitation therefore, ran from the date when sale mutation was attested and thus the respondent pre-emptor's suit was within time---No case was made out for interference with such concurrent findings of fact---Leave to appeal was refused in circumstances. ORDER RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J.---This order will dispose of two petitions, namely, C.P.LA. Nos.71-R of 1989 and 72-R of 1989 filed by Lai Khan petitioner, seeking leave to appeal against two judgments of the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Circuit, dated 9-10-1988, passed in two separate revision petitions. 2. Lai Khan petitioner filed a suit against Mst. Zarina Jan, respondent No.1, to pre-empt the sale made by one Hazratullah in favour of the said lady vendee .... in respect of Khasra No.37 only, on the ground that he had no superior right over the other Khasra numbers sold in her favour. Simultaneously, Khani f,aman respondent No.2 filed a suit against Mst. Zarina Jan, respondent No.1, to pre-empt the same sale in respect of the entire area sold by Hazratullah in favour of the said respondent. Both the suits were consolidated. The trial Court held that both Lal Khan petitioner, and Khani Zaman respondent No.2, were contiguous owners and the latter was also a co-sharer of Khasra No.37 and he, therefore, had a superior right, and none of the pre-emptors had any superior right against the vendee qua the other Khasra numbers sold. He, therefore, decreed the suit in favour of…
🔒
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