| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLG 1488 1991 SLD 1488 1991 SCMR 2001 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.16/Q of 1988, decision dated: 26-05-1991(From the judgment of High Court of Balochistan, Quetta dated 12-8-1987 passed in Civil Revision No. 65 of 1987)
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH AND ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeal No.16/Q of 1988, decision dated: 26-05-1991(From the judgment of High Court of Balochistan, Quetta dated 12-8-1987 passed in Civil Revision No. 65 of 1987)
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH AND ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
GHULAM JILANI and 3 others
GHULAM MUHAMMAD and 7 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)---Art. 185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted to examine whether decision of High Court of Sindh in Hussain Bux's case reported as P L D 1985 Kar. 161, correctly laid down the law as the same was contrary to what the High Court of Sindh had itself been holding in its earlier decisions. Hussain Bux v. Mir Muhammad and 3 others P L D 1985 Kar. 161 ref. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--Art. 185(3)---Muhammadan Law ---Pre-emption suit---Questions pertaining to Talab-e-Mowasibat and Talab-e-Ishhad---Leave granting order---Deviation from---High Court having not followed decision of Hussain Bux's case reported as PLD 1985 Kar. 161 mentioned in leave granting order and having differed with the same, Supreme Court did not deem it necessary to deal exhaustively and finally with the specific question on which leave to appeal had been granted--Record showed that Talab-e-Ishhad was not made in the manner required and was otherwise deficient ---Talab-e-Ishhad was required by law, to be made either in the presence of buyer or the seller or on the premises which were the subject of sale---Such requirement remained un-established by the appellants---Demand having been made before two witnesses who were sent to the purchaser, was claimed without establishing that demand was made in the presence of buyer or the seller or on the premises which were subject of sale---Demand or Talab-e-Isshad was thus, not made in accordance with law.---[Pre-emption]. Abid Husen v. Bashir Ahmad (1890) I L R 20 All. 499; Abbasi Begum v. Afzal Husen and another (1890) I L R 20 All. 457; Rujjub Ali Chopedar v. Chundi Churn Bhadra and others 18901 L R 17 Cal. 543; Nundo Pershad Thakur v. Gopal Thakur I L R 10 Cal. 1008 and Government of N.-W.F.P. through Secretary, Law Department v. Malik Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 SC 360 rel. (c) Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991)--- ----S. 13(3)---North-West Frontier Province, Pre-emption Act (X of 1987), S.13(3) ---Requirement of Talab-e-Ishhad to confirm Talab-e-Mowasibat--- Such requirement finds reproduction in the statutory form in North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act, 1987 as also in Punjab Pre-emption Act,…
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